Talk:Pulque

Local Dollar
since we are talking about Mexico in this article, and the official currency of Mexico is the peso, shouldn't it be in pesos?, anyways, what the heck is a local dollar??? 201.129.11.121 06:50, 19 April 2006 (UTC) is aguamiel the same as agave syrup? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.34.239.254 (talk) 17:50, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Secret ingredient ocpatli to pulque
I have to inform you -in order for future expanding of the article- that there sometimes was a secret ingredient to the pulque, named ocpatli or ocpantli (depending Nahuatal or Tehuana language). Oc stand for October and the secret ingredient was added at the October festivities. The flowering of that secret ingredient is in October. Al the scrolls have been destroyed by the Church, so no-one knows what plant it is. Some language books say it was "resinosa"; sticky. One would think about marihuana flowers, but according to a Oaxacan anthropologist, that plant was not available in teh America's at that time. Furthermore almost the same letters as in ocpatli, are in Copal; a sticky juice from a specific tree. When hardened, they're used as a burning smelling stick in churches and should take away bad spirits. No idea if and what made the language connection with copal, but its a candidate. Sources: library of the botanic garden of Oaxaca MM 84.81.213.44 (talk) 00:50, 30 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Must be some confusion, possibly mistranslation. Oc does not stand for 'October' (instead can mean 'once, first' or 'always'), and pantli means 'wall' or 'ridge'. Probably you intend the word ocpahtli, which indeed is a plant used to facilitate the maguey liquor fermentation process, and bestows its colour. It's derived from pahtli 'medicine, potion' (esp. plant-derived); the word copal is quite unrelated. I don't think ocpahtli is a "secret ingredient", per se. --cjllw ʘ  TALK 00:48, 3 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Complete BS. Is this supposed to be a joke?Senor Cuete (talk) 21:22, 16 October 2008 (UTC)Senor Cuete

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging
This article talk page was automatically added with WikiProject Food and drink banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here. If you have concerns, please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 11:07, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Rewriting article
Completely rewriting the article is unacceptable:

1. Wikipedia articles are collaborations. Major changes should be discussed here before you make them.

2. Your edits added valuable information but removed as much good text which should have remained. An example would be the text about the unusual fermentation.

3. Your edits appear to be lifted directly from dubious web sites. For example the one that calls Pulque "Mayan Madness". Someone that doesn't know the Maya from the Aztecs can't be too knowledgeable about the people of Mesoamerica can he? These seem to be unsourced poor quality sites. Senor Cuete (talk) 14:25, 12 September 2009 (UTC)Senor Cuete


 * Not true.I agree that Mayan Madness isnt the best of the sources (though it is a source sponsored by a mescal maker, but it is in English, which I keep hearing I should use. Spanish-language sources are indeed better. BTW... completely reverting my edits isnt "collaborating" either...  and I have rewritten a number of articles such as Agustín de Iturbide, Tenango del Valle Taxco and a lot more. Nothing wrong with rewriting (often times it is easier) and a less-than-great citation source is better than none at all. Check the DYK nomination page for this article  for other comments on the article.Thelmadatter (talk) 00:32, 13 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Who cares what other articles you wrote? It doesn't make you an authority on this subject. You turned a pretty good article into one full of unsourced and dubious factiods and which lacks citations. Senor Cuete (talk) 01:01, 13 September 2009 (UTC)Senor Cuete

The article was interesting and accurate before you rewrote it. You never discussed what you did or didn't like about it here. You removed all of the useful and interesting content. Your rewrite consisted of cut-and-pasting content from sites that you admit are crap. What was the point? Since you are an administrator I assume that you will admonish me for engaging in an edit war. Go ahead. Why don't you also ban me from editing for a week? I'll be out of town so it won't matter anyway. If you have any integrity you will call for arbitration and start a dialog or a poll here about your changes. This won't happen of course. If one is quite ignorant about some subject, maybe he should leave the article alone. Senor Cuete (talk) 13:54, 13 September 2009 (UTC)Senor Cuete

All of my information is sourced, none of the information in the previous version was sourced with in-text citations. That which was not sourced (with in-line citations) and I could not find in my sources, I did not put back on the article, as it is impossible for me to guess what information in the previous version came from which book. I would love to see those books and would be more than happy to put it back ... or happy for you to put it in using the in-text citation method. Only one of my sources is iffy.... is any of the information from it false? Instead of vandalizing my work, why dont you fold in the information you feel is important to the article, using in-text citations for those books? I would love to see more information about pulquerias in the article. The "lousy" source makes a number of assertions, which I kind of know to be true, but I felt were too controversial to put in given the source. A better source talking about the kind of clientle generally frequents pulquerias and such. To put back your information and maybe add more (as Im sure your books have) does not mean that you should take out the information I have added. You dont need special collaboration to add a great deal of information but you do need it to remove a great deal... unless there is no way to source the information.

All I ask you is to work your information back in with in-text citations, without throwing out mine. You know what comes from where, not me. Two things I should remind you of, once you upload work into Wikipedia, it is no longer yours to control, Wikipedia itself says that if you dont want your work mercilessly edited by other, dont upload it. Number two, the article was not complete as it was, nor is it complete now. If you look at this talk page, it is rated only as a "Start" class article. Thelmadatter (talk) 23:16, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Picture
Could we please have a picture of the drink itself? I've only seen pictures of containers of the drink, or bars serving the drink, or people (real or fictional) who are associated with the drink. I don't have any idea of what the drink actually looks like. J I P | Talk 17:42, 24 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Done. Closeup of glass of pulque added. Geoff  TC 20:21, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you! It looks very much like milk, or like ouzo after being mixed with water. J I P  | Talk 23:57, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

oulque
Is it the same stuff? Cfr. The Moon of Montezuma, novel by Cornell Woolrich, 1952. He speaks about a drink he calls oulque. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.153.43.42 (talk) 19:12, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Drunkenness in casta painting
Personally I think that this section is pretty irrelevant and should go, in favor of adding a link to a casta painting article. Senor Cuete (talk) 00:59, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Alcohol content level?
This article should say what the typical alcohol percentage was, then and now.Jimhoward72 (talk) 05:43, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:06, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Agave Pulque.JPG

Inconsistency
The article states, with references, "While some establishments may forbid women, it is much more common for the establishment to provide a separate seating area for them. Intermingling of the sexes is not permitted."

However, immediately above this statement is a photograph of a man and a woman sitting at the same table in a pulqueria. So evidently the sexes are allowed to mingle in at least some establishments. I recommend removing the statement to the contrary. Psuliin (talk) 19:59, 27 February 2023 (UTC)


 * There are four references here, and I suggest you look and see what they actually say. Laws vary from one state to another. At least one of the sources (Mayan Madness, see "Rewriting article" section above) is of questionable reliability. Where I live in Mexico women were not allowed in the cantinas until about 25 years ago. Now it would be very unusual to find a cantina that doesn't allow women, it might not even be legal to exclude them. GA-RT-22 (talk) 19:44, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Maguey confusion
Maguey seems to be an ambiguous term, at least the link leads to a disambiguation page. It's either a synonym for agave, or a name for one species of agave, Agave americana. We use the term in this article without defining it. We do say that any of about six species of agave can be used to make pulque. I don't think we should say that the maguey plant is called a "century plant" in English, because that implies that pulque can only be made from Agave americana. GA-RT-22 (talk) 19:52, 3 May 2023 (UTC)