Talk:Ron Zacapa Centenario

Comments
This entry has been written from an objective point of view. Where language such as "super-high premium" has been used, it refers to categories of Rum classification.

Can you clarify where this contravenes your guidelines?

Hyperhappen (talk) 15:38, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

References are available to establish notability:. --J.Mundo (talk) 16:52, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

I find this article interesting and factual - I wondered what the band around my bottle was about, and mow i know. I also agree with J.Mundo - the awards and notability seem well referenced and the opinions expressed those of connoiseurs. Objective I presume. —Preceding unsigned comment added by J Active (talk • contribs) 17:33, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

I have tried listing the different grades of Ron Zacapa, but they are being deleted. Look at courvoisier for example. Can you allow them please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.36.161.100 (talk) 09:46, 16 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I absolutely love this rum, but 'our' guidelines make it clear that advertorial texts are not what wikipedia is for. With language like 'carefully crafted', 'intensely sweet dark', 'hard work and dedication', etc. it is patently clear that this is not a neutral article but an advertisement. I will clean it up. 79.78.176.9 (talk) 10:27, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I did some cleanup and removed some of the peacock language. Will likely revisit and do some more in the near future. --CNMall41 (talk) 00:00, 4 August 2017 (UTC)