Draft talk:Ilegal Mezcal

Contested deletion

Thank you for the comments! I think a second pair of eyes should take a look here, it feels like Maliner (who originally tagged this for deletion) may have just made a quick decision that I don't think holds up.

As of 2023/24, Mezcal is among the most popular liquor styles with 11MM liters consumed in 2023 (https://www.usfoods.com/our-services/business-trends/mezcal-s-popularity-continues-to-grow.html) (https://resto.newcity.com/2023/05/17/having-a-moment-please-drink-more-mezcal-like-right-now/#:~:text=According%20to%20data%20out%20of,United%20States%20reports%20were%20consumed.)

Within Mezcal, Ilegal is a segment leader. The article is not promotional in nature, it simply seeks to bring previously missing information to the general pool of knowledge.

On Wikipedia, we have a verified page for the "Ilegal Cocktail" which has existed and grown since May 2020 ... describing the IBA certified cocktail which is named after this Company. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_(cocktail). We should be logically consistent in our treatment here.

We have wikipedia pages for Tito's (leader in Vodka), Bacardi (which just acquired Ilegal), and several comparable beverage brands.

If the above is helpful, maybe we should kill the speedy deletion tag. If something in the article needs to be changed, please feel free to let me know. Think that anyone who is familiar with the liquor / beverage space would quickly see this and question this speedy deletion tag as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrewkazimi (talk • contribs)

Andrewkazimi:  Done per your request, as I have trimmed promotional content from there. The present version of your article is substantially different from the version that I have tagged for G11. Cheers! Maliner (talk) 14:21, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Per your comment, On Wikipedia, we have a verified page for the "Ilegal Cocktail" which has existed and grown since May 2020 ... describing the IBA certified cocktail which is named after this Company. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_(cocktail). We should be logically consistent in our treatment here, you are clearly connected to the subject, so it needs to be checked by one our AFC reviewers. You should see WP:COI and disclose your COI accordingly. Thanks. Maliner (talk) 14:28, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

@Maliner I have been a wikipedia editor since 2017, and edited/created a diverse array of articles across all subjects. I have no connection to this random mezcal company - as an adult consumer of beverages I'm very familiar with it because it's a staple for any bar.

When I said "We" I meant we as in the global wikipedia community, in the same way one could, for example say "We have an article for Taylor Swift on wikipedia."

It feels like you are making speedy judgments and I would encourage you to take a second and review the topic at hand. I will be re-adding the page, as (A) I have confirmed that I have no COI (B) You have already confirmed that the latest version of the page is free of promotional content

If there are any issues with the page, feel free to leave a tag for someone else to review, but your current approach seems quite biased and I think you should leave it to another editor/reviewer, as your two points have been addressed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrewkazimi (talk • contribs)

Andrewkazimi: Ridiculous. You have been here since 2017, and you don't know how to properly sign your comments and reply to other editors. Since your earlier attempts were too promotional, I will suggest you go through the AFC review, and I think it should not be a problem for you since you don't have any COI. Right? Maliner (talk) 15:22, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Maliner: Maliner, to pause for one moment, why are you talking to me like that? Your tone isn't a respectful, nor is it collegial. It'd be just as easy to say "Please remember to sign your comments." We should remember that we are on the same team - both of us love this platform and have the goal of contributing to it, and that type of tone with one another is not at al good representation of what the collegial editor community should sound like.

If I may, will pivot back to the main point: The information currently shared on the page mirrors information provided on any comparable page i.e. Tito's Vodka or Maker's Mark or Casamigos for example.

I think the right messaging from you in this instance would have been "Hey Andrew! I identified some instances where your original language was too promotional, here are some tweaks to achieve neutral tone." as opposed to calling COI with no clear indication of a connection, beyond just tone of original draft... which would be an easy tweak through suggestions.

You're an awesome editor and have contributed so much to wikipedia. I'm always open to feedback especially from other smart people, but that feedback should be constructive and respectful in delivery.

I think from here let's just let others take a look at this with fresh eyes. I have no vested interest in this article but I firmly believe that as a global editor community we must be (a) logically consistent in our treatment of articles (b) respectful to other editors, not condescending (c) constructive in the feedback we share with one another.

Andrewkazimi (talk) 15:42, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

As a final note - going forward I think it would be awesome we could approach things more like we're sitting on the same side of the table. You're such an awesome editor, 6,000+ edits is amazing. I would love to be able to benefit from that experience through more constructive/detailed comments and walkthrough of your thought process if ever relevant again. Beyond just action (i.e. tagging deletion and calling COI), I don't think I really got much explanation of your thought processes this time around, but I would love to learn from more thorough explanations in future instances. You've reviewed/edited the same articles as me in the past so I'm sure we'll continue to interact!

Thanks for the help here, and for everything you do for the wikipedia community. hope you have a wonderful day.

Andrewkazimi (talk) 15:55, 14 January 2024 (UTC)