Talk:Vodka/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions. 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

Rearranging history section?

The first paragraph somehow seamlessly moves from alchemist destillation to the development of rectification and machines in Western Europe. Thus as I read it looks as vodka was developed in western europe. Shouldnt it be moved to the end after description of the traditional making of vodka in countries such as Russia and Poland? It would be also useful to know when the modern technology was imported to those countries? Koliokolio 00:00, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

You would not find any good proof of any of this story I am sure. It was too many years ago:) Just rumor... ( I am Russian)Qqzzccdd 21:22, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

US Federal Law... not necessarily 40%

I believe that this line may now be incorrect...

"Under US Federal law, the minimum alcohol strength of vodka is also 40% by volume..."

The current trend for "flavored" vodkas is 35% ABV, yet they are still considered vodkas. Just my 2 cents...

I agree. I've removed that part and added a reference for the EU minimum that I found from the Gin and Vodka Association (which might be a good general source for this article, should it need it). [1] Eric (EWS23) 23:15, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Percentage of ethanol obtained by distillation

I'm quite sure that this sentence is wrong : "Currently, such machines can work continuously and produce beverages containing almost 97% of alcohol without any taste or smell. This allows for production of pure vodkas.". The fact is, when percentage of ethanol reach 95.6%, it forms an azeotrope with water who boils at something like 78°C. By using only distillation, you can't reach more than 95.6% ethanol. If those "machines" can reach almost 97%, then it must not use only distillation. Please clarify...

Agree, this is not true. Qqzzccdd 21:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Stalin

Didn't Stalin institute a period of prohibition and outlawed vodka, but after a few years he realized vodka's 'instrinsic cultural value', repealed the ban and actually promoted it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.75.187.195 (talk) 08:33, 28 March 2007 (UTC).

Etymology

This article lists both водить and разводить as meaning "to dilute." As far as I know, водить means "to move" and has no connection with разводить other than the obvious root. Unless someone disputes this, I'll be changing it soon.--Sidhebolg 07:44, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

To dilute: разбавить, разводить is "to separate" according to AltaVista. Rklawton 16:35, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

According to Langenscheidt, разводить means a number of things, "to dilute" included (I'd say the more common use, though, is "to divorce", as that is how I learned it). While разбавить also means "to dilute", it is the perfective form of разбавлять, and I would think that the imperfective aspect would be better to use in an etymology section. However, I would really like to see someone come forward with a source for this section, as it would clarify a great deal.--Sidhebolg 08:03, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

In Polish wieść (<*ved-ti)means to lead, while wodzić (vod-i-ti) is a kind of continuous aspect. I think its similarity to vodka is a coincidence. To dilute would be rozwodnić (make it apart roz- by water -wod-), clearly derived from and not a source for woda.

So... it is really from Russian, not from Polish? In Polish vodka is "wódka", and water - "woda", so, in English and other languages it is often by "v" not by "w" only, and this Russian word also provides from Polish. DRS
Word "voda" is not Russian. It derives from historical Proto-Slavic language. This word is exatly the same in many modern Slavian languages: Czech, Slovak, Polish, Croatian, Slovenian, Russian, Ukrainian etc. In some slavic languages is very similar (eg. in Belarusian is "vada"). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.156.124.208 (talk) 12:56, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

0.7 pass

This article has been passed for inclusion in Wikipedia 0.7. Funpika 23:02, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Sandomierz

Please provide a real good, first hand scholarly reference, not just some vodka-selling website, which I could have done myself. So far I failed to find anything meaningful beyond "1405... Sandomizerz...bla bla...", with no first-hand references and no explanation in what context and how the word was used. `'Mїkka 23:56, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

It is not true there was no Poland at the time (1405). Poland was divided into virtually independent feudal duchies 1138-1320, and completely partitioned between Prussia, Russia and Austria 1793-1918 (except short lived Duchy of Warsaw under Napoleon and so called Kindom of Poland 1815-186? ruled by the tzar, autonomous 1815-1832). In 1405 Poland was ruled by a Lithuanian duke, but that did not mean subjection to Lithuania, he was simply invited to rule (and respect all Polish institutions) since the previous dynasty lacked a male heir. More under: Jogaila.

In 1405 was no Poland?? No comment...

Why no comment? I think that someone who wrote it is from the USA and she or he think that the USA was at that time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.158.199.80 (talk) 09:49, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

If it goes for Sandomierz (Sanodomiria), it was some court document, i`ll do my research on this matter and try to provide reference, better than some vodka selling website. Btw. if we want to look after reference for every claim in this article, i want to see some about "bread wine" or "horilka" (Polish: gorzałka), i mean real reference, not soviet "science" institute or something like that. Mikołajski (talk) 22:17, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Please don't waste time to comment on nonsense remarks. Please do find a real reference. Soviet science institute is no better no worse than Polish vodka sellers, if real documents are cited, not just speculations. As to the particular case of "bread wine", the phrase contains no critical information, and the term is rather well-known and searchable in google, both in Russian and English, see e.g. a book Moonshine Markets by Alan Haworth, Ronald Simpson here- Altenmann >t 22:03, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Other language - false statement?

Mikka, i added: "According to Chernykh's "Historical Etymological Dictionary of the Modern Russian Language", the word vodka in Slavic languages other than Russian refers to Russian vodka."

You removed, saying that it's a false statement.

It is not false - please take a look at this dictionary, page 159. --Amir E. Aharoni 21:14, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm really not in the mood for edit wars. Will you at least explain why are you removing it? --Amir E. Aharoni 22:14, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Before writing wikipedia it is recommended to read wikipedia. Because the statement in the dictionary is not confirmed by historical examples. In Russia first known record of the word vodka is dated by mid-17th centrury. Poland claims the record of the word "wodka" dated by 15th centrury. We don't have to fill wikipedia with examples of unconfirmed dictionary definitions. Wikipedia simply writes that the orign is not estabished with any reasonable certainty. `'Míkka 02:27, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

"National" origins

The section on Russia contains this passage:

"Russia A drink similar to modern vodka first appeared probably sometime in the 950-1100.[citation needed] It was not originally called vodka — instead, the term bread wine(хлебное вино) was used."

There was no Russia at that time. There was no recognized state in the area. There was Rus, a land of many tribes and ethnic groups, most of them (but not all) of Slavic origin. And it would be advisable to add where the drink appeared.

As the name indicates the bread wine(хлебное вино) seems to be just a kind of barley wine. Vodka can be distilled of that. So the passage above is baseless.Yeti (talk) 18:12, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Merge in Vodka infusion ?

I'm not sure what scope there is to expand the Vodka infusion article, I'd be tempted to merge it in here and then splinter it again in future if need be - views? FlagSteward 16:51, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

ExtraSept is polyhexamethylene guanide hydrochloride(a disinfectant)

Please write it in the article otherwise nobody would know what you're talking about. Thanks :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.88.254.109 (talk) 14:26, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Why is Vodka made from Sugar Beet Molasses "not true vodka?"

Referring to the Revision as of 17:41, 26 June 2008 by Peter558, I'd throw a citation needed in there, but the page is protected. The article points out early on what vodka is made of, and generally defines it as a clear spirit of ~40 to 50 proof strength. However, somehow, if this spirit is made from Sugar Beets, it doesn't count as vodka. Says who? Evillawngnome (talk) 15:31, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I got my established user creds, so i'm putting a ^{[citation needed]} on the first paragraph. The whole thing needs more credible source, and a clear definition of vodka. Evillawngnome (talk) 14:15, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I was interested to observe that the first mention of vodka ingredients was cited as potato. I understand that most vodka these days is made from grain mash (wheat, barley or rye). The few main brands that had useful information contained within their, primarily marketing, websites described the primary ingredient as some kind of grain (Finlandia, Absolut). From a review of a few other websites (e.g. http://www.tastings.com/spirits/vodka.html) it would appear that potato, molasses and other base materials can be used to make vodka, however in this entry it may be more appropriate to describe them separately as they not the commonly used ingredient.Spanielbones (talk) 09:30, 29 July 2008 (UTC) I always thought that real vodka was made from potatoes. Can anyone comment on this? DGerman (talk) 19:39, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

the Russian government has pretty strict production guidelines when it comes to producing vodka, so it's probably according to the Russian government. commercially produced vodka within Russia today is mainly pure grain alcohol, using anything else than grain/sugar beets (cutting corners) is not allowed by law. Markthemac (talk) 13:30, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Vodka was only produced from potatoes in the crisis years, as moonshine this was because potato's grew faster than grain and was easy to keep up in private gardens within Russia.

originally vodka couldn't have been made with potatoes because it wasn't a common crop within Europe, the potato only arrived in Europe at 1536 and only became really popular in 18th century. Markthemac (talk) 13:43, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

I checked with the owner of a vodka distillery in Russia (I've got a picture of his bottling machinery in Commons), and the answer was "wheat". Rklawton (talk) 00:33, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

History

check this for countrie in Europe in 14 th century http://www.euratlas.com/travel_time/europe_north_east_1300.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.217.95.214 (talk) 20:36, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Vodka

The article names the spirit in question "Wodka" throughout. This is correct from neither a grammatical or transliterational point of view. Also, Vodka is NOT pronounced "votka" as claimed in the article, but rather as it is spelled Vodka (the original russian pronunciation merely has a longre "o" sound than the english pronunciation). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.220.56.103 (talk) 22:11, 29 July 2008 (UTC) But why "Russian", not "Polish"? DRS —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.158.199.80 (talk) 09:57, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Taurine

Speculative statement and implication that taurine prevents sleep removed. Possible confusion with caffeine in red bull, but in either case, unsubstantiated by supporting evidence or reference and deemed speculative.

"Questions remain..." not a good sign of a solid proven fact...

170.149.100.10 (talk) 14:26, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Distillation info?

The article claims that unlike vodka, whisky is only distilled to it's final alcohol content, other than the very few cask strengths out there this is just untrue. The vast majority of whiskys are watered down prior to bottling in order to get to around 40-43%. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.228.201.107 (talk) 07:33, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Possible Error/typo? Liquor store or pharmacy?

"The Poles make a very pure (95%, 190 proof) rectified spirit (Polish language: spirytus rektyfikowany). Technically a form of vodka, it is sold in liquor stores, not pharmacies"

I know nothing about this, but looks like it should read "sold in pharmacies, not liquor stores" I'd assume you would typically buy alcohol at a liquor store in poland, and finding an alcoholic beverage at a pharmacy would be the exception. RottenDog (talk) 02:30, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

That's no error! However, it takes for granted that the reader knows that many (but not all) western countries ban the sale of liquors with 190 proof in liquor stores. In these countries, such alcohol is only available in pharmacies. In Poland it is sold in liquor stores. By the way, you would not typically buy alcohol at a liquor store in poland. In Poland, like in virtually every other Eastern European country, most alcohol is sold in normal super markets. ;) 95.89.159.69 (talk) 18:20, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

This is what thirst of vodka did to Russia!

See: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6099906.stm

No wonder russians are predicted to disappear entirely by 2125 (by 2050 they will be a minority in their own land to chinese immigrants). 195.70.32.136 18:30, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Almost free vodka for poor russians, manufacturers propose to stop metanol deaths:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6157015.stm

This is obviously placed here by some deranged person ( Polish maybe ?), and it should be deleted ASAP —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.81.5.211 (talk) 15:50, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

my brother died from vodka overdose. He bled out the penis. As to the comment, I agree. That has nothing to do with the link however, the BBC is a VERY credible source.--Tacit tatum (talk) 06:31, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

"Zeleno vino" is not a "green wine".

It's incorrect to interpret "zeleno vino" ("зелёно вино", with stress on 2-nd syllable) as a "green wine". Actually it's a derivative from obsolete "zel'eno vino" ("зельeно вино", stress on first syllable) what means "herbal wine" or even "medicine wine", "zelie" ("зелие") is a mix of medicine herbs. See William Pokhliebkin "History of vodka" Part 2, ch 2: http://www.gumer.info/bibliotek_Buks/History/Pohleb/16.php 4/20/09 76.190.142.36 (talk) 05:18, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

It was his opinion, not necessarily correct. Lithuanian "žalias vynas" may be rather independent from Muscovites'. I've re-read the paragraph in original Pokhliebkin book, and see it has linguistic issues, and no wonder, he was no linguist. - Altenmann >t 21:43, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

First sentence is dumb

Alcohol being "composed solely of water and ethanol" is surely bollocks because grain or any sugar product must be fermented before it is distilled. Ethanol will not be distilled. and if you're drinking vodka make from ethanol i hope you enjoy your last few years —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.30.230.79 (talk) 19:50, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Vodka in not MADE from ethanol. Vodka IS ethanol, diluted. Get it? — Tatry (talk) 15:24, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

You are mixing up what it's made from and what the end product is composed of. 173.164.86.190 (talk) 19:30, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Mendeleev?

There is no information in scientific sources that Mendeleev did actually perform some research about vodka. His work was mainly about properties of different mixes of spirit/water and he didn't managed to find anything specific about 38% or 40%. It was old russian tradition for making vodka with about 38%abv, and the percentage was rounded up to 40 to simplify the tax computation So, I dont think that Mendeleev should be noted in article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.23.212.133 (talk) 12:55, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

The statement about Mendeleev and vodka is widely known. Do you have any sources which say it is false? Our phrase "There is no information" is not a proof: the information may be there, only you did not find it. - Altenmann >t 21:46, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Actually it is Your job to give some source of these fact. "Earth is flat" was also a "widely known fact" long time ago. For the sake of good and objective history writing You should attempt to try confirming this interesting information. -Heniek —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.191.148.212 (talk) 19:06, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to remove that part soon per WP:REDFLAG. The info, which is unverified, looks like some sort of local legend, told at parties perhaps among happy drinkers. ---Tatry (talk) 03:18, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Sandomierz court documents

I have already contested some time ago the mentioning 1405 court documents of Sandomierz as coming from not-reliable source, which gives neither further references, nor context. For over two years I don't see any news. I tagged the phrase and will wait for 10 days for sufficiently credible reference to be provided, i.e., which:

be a reference from a scholarly source, with known authorship
will provide reference to a primary source and give a sufficient context to determine whether and how the word was used.

If not, I am deleting the phrase as dubious. - Altenmann >t 21:32, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Vodka and coke

Vodka and coke redirects here but there is no mention of such a drink. I'd add it but I don't want to add something potentially trivial. 90.213.61.205 (talk) 21:02, 14 May 2010 (UTC) I have tried it before and nothing really seems to happen. To me, nothing happened because the coke is sugared, so it brings the vodka to a lower rate of getting drunk. Then again, it also depends on the persons' body intake and how their body handles it. Learn more about whipped cream vodka. ARod122491 (talk) 05:45, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

BBC

The BBC article about "Extrasept" appears, on first glance, to be grossly misinformed. The points it raises are blatantly unscientific (viz.: dirty factory, dead liver cells) and it misspelled the name of the compound (polyhexamethylene guanidine hydrochloride) which, if used properly, can make your drinking water safer.

99.242.38.138 (talk) 05:36, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Poor Distillation.

This should be changed. "Illegally homemade ......is sometimes sold in Russia and Ukraine, with an abv as high as 62%, which is partly due to its poor distillation." How can high strength spirit be consider poor distillation? All spirits are distilled to high proof and diluted for bottling. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.76.255 (talk) 13:21, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Etymology

As alcohol had long been used as a basis for medicines, this implies that the term vodka could be a noun derived from the verb vodit’, razvodit’ (водить, разводить), "to dilute with water".

This seems a very doubtful information: in Russian the old long 'o' and short 'o' have merged, yielding 'o'. But in Polish the old short 'o' is now 'o', while the old long 'o' is now 'u' (written 'ó'). Wódka contains the root 'vod-' with the old long vowel, but wodzić/rozwodzić (to distribute) has the root with old short 'o', whereas rozwadniać (dilute with water), has a completely different vowel -a- in the root. Therefore I would guess that the word "vodka" is unrelated to 'razvodit' and the similarity of the roots is superficial and confined to the Russian language because of the local phonetic developments. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.87.13.74 (talk) 00:17, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Translate please anyone...

Я не могу объясняться английским языком, простите; но зачем, будучи невеждами, вы пустились в такие глупости?

О каких таких фонетических изменениях вы говорите?

О каком таком слитии «короткого» и «длинного» «о» идет речь?

Заметьте, пожалуйста, что польское «ó» [u] есть перемена из «о».

— — — — —

Слова «водка» и «разводить» от разных корней!

И в русском языке это очевиднейшая вещь!

И еще: первый и второй корни различны, но содержат один и тот же гласный.

Я не представляю, как можно путать «водку», «воднить», «наводнить» со словами «водить», «разводить» и так далее. 109.252.89.140 (talk) 03:38, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Stolibottle.png Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Stolibottle.png, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests August 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 20:26, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Distillation of vodka vs. other spirits

The article states that the difference between vodka and other distilled spirits is that vodka is distilled to a higher alcohol content and then diluted, while whiskey (for example) is only distilled to drinking strength. I do not believe this is accurate. My understanding is that whiskey is also distilled to a much higher alcohol content and then diluted for bottling as well. I think this reference should be deleted. Agtrade (talk) 19:41, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Is Polish Krupnik a vodka or a liqueur?

I don't know about Lithuanian krupnik but I have never heard of Polish krupnik as being a flavored vodka, but a liqueur. Anyone have knowledge on this? --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 12:37, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Edit warring on Vodka

Please stop assuming ownership of vodka, user Be-with (talk · contribs). Behavior such as this is regarded as disruptive, and is a violation of Wikipedia policy. You seem to be making repeated edits since 22 February 2013‎ beginning with your Static IP address 31.200.181.224 (talk · contribs), that multiple other people disagree with, and not providing any real explanation of the changes. More relevant info available at Wikipedia:Blocking policy. Thanks, Poeticbent talk 22:15, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Chili pepper flavored

Chili pepper flavored vodka is not new. It's hundreds of years old and part of old Slavic folk remedies. Rklawton (talk) 19:35, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

It is not a diminutive form of the Slavic word voda (water)

I am from Russia and believe me vodka is not a diminutive form. May be it has such roots but now it is not, "vodka" doesn't sound as a small or little water to the Russian native speaker. It has no special tinge. It is perfectly explained in the article Diminutive#Russian. 91.77.225.230 (talk) 21:16, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Please see Talk:Vodka/Archive_1#The_Etymology_of_the_word_Vodka. In short: it's a referenced statement and even if today "vodka" doesn't mean small water it was once the origin of the word. Languages change over hundreds of years. Sjö (talk) 11:05, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

It is in polish. Maybe it's a definitive proof vodka originates in Poland? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.72.210.170 (talk) 18:21, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Is Russian vodka a distilled liquor? Distillation vs. mixing industrially rectified spirit with water

I may be completely misinformed, but as far as I know, modern Russian (and post-Soviet\CIS) vodka has NOTHING to do with what is described in this article (and is lovingly promoted by the marketing of vodka makers). Since 1890s, Russian vodka (again AFAIK) is a product of mixing very high-proof, industrially rectified ethanol spirit with water, filtered several times and with various optional additives. No traditional distillation process whatsoever, which would impart some taste from the raw ingredients; thus any mash can be used. As far as the modern Russian vodkas go, this can be verified just by looking at the table of contents.

Distilled vodkas (plural, because this was a kind of liquor, not single recipe) were different beverages, made by distillation from various mashes with various flavourings, typically 38,5% ABV. These were what was called "vodka"; the semantic change was brought about only in 1936, when the mix of rectified spirit and water (so called "table strong wine") was legally renamed "vodka", and genuine vodkas were renamed "vodka-type beverages". It is said (see Russian wiki article, for example) that the transition was motivated by RETURN of the vodka state monopoly in 1890s (this article implies that there was no vodka monopoly after 1860s and in Soviet Union, which is clearly obvious even for a layman).

Since industrially rectified spirit is extremely cheap, the "new" vodka would be very profitable (either for state monopoly or private producers); thus the myth of modern Russian (and post-Soviet\CIS) vodka being an ancient, "all-natural", "healthy" liquor is promoted by mixing the two meanings of the word. The proliferation of this myth was supported first by Czarist government, then by Soviet government, then by private Russian\CIS vodka makers for the same economic reasons.

It is important to note that, inversely, the making of vodka by distillation was OUTLAWED by the same monopoly, and STILL IS illegal when done by an individual. The stigma against so-called "samogon" (self-distilled) was reinforced with propaganda for more than 100 years. While many Russian families still make their own liquor as a hobby (again, illegally), the stigma causes the cognitive dissonance that makes people perceive distilled liquor at the same time as a natural, better quality and milder on the palate (which it usually REALLY is, if made properly; expensive commercially produced samogons exist); and pertain its image of something coarse, backward, poisonous, rough-neck and rural (like the English "moonshine"). The same linguistic programming ingrained the notion of vodka being extremely clean, clear and hygienic (as the Ruswiki article states, this "brand identity" was established as early as the unpopular return of the monopoly in 1890s). So vodka is traditionally "clear as a tear" in Russian songs, and the popular image of samogon is coarse murky "pervach" (heads) gulped down by village drunkards.

If an expert on alcohol beverages is prepared to back me on some of these claims, that would mean the complete overhaul of this article (or addition of relevant clarifications whenever Russian vodka is discussed) is in order.--21:51, 16 December 2012 (UTC)AyeBraine (talk)

But where do they get the rectified spirit from in the first place? By distilling it! That the neutral spirit is then cut with water to potable levels (typically 40% abv) is the same where ever the vodka is made. There's nothing distinct or illegitimate about the Russian practice. It's the same where ever you go. Now is it true that the modern spirit is different from historical forms which were more like whisky or kornbrand? Yes, but, again, that's true of everywhere. That's what all modern vodkas are: spirits distilled to neutral proofs, diluted down with water to potable levels. I think the article covers it quite well and your reading is in error. oknazevad (talk) 12:40, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Ultimately, the whole issue of regional means-of-production is about the reliable third-party sources, as always. Ethanol can be made from virtually anything, even from wood (i.e. cellulose). Please add citations to the mix. Poeticbent talk

Rectification and distillation are not the same thing, these are quite different processes. Rectification results in neutral, flavor-free ethanol, and distillation keeps some of the flavors and impurities in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.87.139.27 (talk) 13:17, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Rectification is just repeated distillation. In order to rectify spirit, one must distill it; there's no distinct chemical process used. See rectified spirit. It is quite possible to intentionally not distill up to neutral levels, as is done in all forms of whisky, but to get to neutral levels, one indeed must distill. oknazevad (talk) 18:36, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Production by country

The history section concentrates on Poland, Russia and Sweden. It would be good to have some history of vodka production elsewhere, including the Baltics and other ex-Soviet states, and in the U.S. (mainly after WWII). Also suggest a chart of current production by country. Sca (talk) 17:20, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Malted or Unmalted Grain?

I have a question about vodka, and I hope this is the right forum in which to submit it: how is fermentable sugar produced from grain to make vodka? In the case of whisky, the grain is malted to produce the fermentable sugars, but I guess this isn't the case with vodka...in fact I'm kind of assuming that the absence of malting is what distinguishes "grain vodka" from "whisky". I suppose what I'm saying (in a round-about sort of way) is that the "Production" section of this article could probably use this information, if anyone has it.86.28.255.197 (talk) 15:33, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

There's some malted grain to provide the enzymes for starch-to-sugar conversion, but it's rarely all malted. Malted barely actually supplies such an excess of enzymes that only a small amount of malted grain is needed to completely convert the grain mash before fermentation. Bourbon, rye whiskey, and Irish single pot still whiskey, for example, use mostly unmalted grain in their makeup, with only about 10% malted barley usually for bourbon.

It's not the presence vs absence of malt that separates vodka from whiskey. Whiskey is distilled to lower proof so it retains some flavor a from the grain, and it's aged in wooden barrels, whereas vodka is distilled to almost pure alcohol before being cut to potable levels with additional water, and is not aged. That's the difference, not the use of malt. oknazevad (talk) 15:54, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Oknazevad - a very interesting and informative answer to my question. The varieties of brewing and distilling never cease to fascinate! 86.28.255.197 (talk) 02:42, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Why is the Poland in the first place in this article?

I don't understand why Poland is the first in the article though recent studies show that vodka was invented in Russia. "According to the Gin and Vodka Association (GVA), the first distillery was documented over three hundred years later at Khlynovsk as reported in the Vyatka Chronicle of 1174." Can you read that? That is a very reliable source and I have not even added it to the article. Jomlini (talk) 17:44, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

I agree with Jomlini. I see that there are certain Polish guys here pushing their point of view. 176.93.18.96 (talk) 17:52, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Actually I'm Russian. And Polish. And unconvinced by any change that rests on a source known to be unreliable. I also do t like it when someone comes in, makes a change, is reverted, and reverts a bunch more times before discussing. That's a sure sign of POV pushing. Especially when it's clear there's nationalistic motives. Frankly, I don't give a fig which comes first, as nationalism is an idiotic motive for anything, but I want reliable sources. oknazevad (talk) 18:09, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

User:Jomlini, if you continue to log out to post support for your own rants, you will be blocked from editing. Please consider that Poeticbent talk 18:06, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Ah, yeah, obvious sockpuppetry is another clear sign of a nationalistic POV pushing editor. Don't do that again. oknazevad (talk) 18:09, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

See: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jomlini. Thanks, Poeticbent talk 18:35, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

No offense guys but the fact that two guys from Poland are saying me that I'm a nationalistic pov pusher though you are reverting me because I placed Russia first is just hilarious and extremely ironic. Let's be adults now. Can you two answer my question what you didn't answer for some reason, maybe you two don't even know the answer? I think it is just fair to place Russia first because most of the people in the world think and believe that the vodka was invented in Russia, I think it is a fact too. Also by seeing your edits It seems that you are the natiolistic man here who pretty much edits only articles of Poland and judaism. PS: I'm from Finland and I'm Finnish, how can I be a nationalistic Russian then? Jomlini (talk) 18:32, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Poeticbent you told me to "take it to talk page" and now I'm asking you. Why should Poland be in the first place? This is just bizarre that you delete my comment though you asked me to ask it. If something is, this is POV pushing. So answer my question. EDIT: It was Oknazevad who told me to take it to the talk page. Jomlini (talk) 10:38, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Poeticbent and Oknazevad You will have to answer my question so we can together achieve a consensus. Jomlini (talk) 10:44, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

You want factually talk? Ok. First, I'm of Polish decent, but I'm also of Russian descent (I'm an American). So I don't have a particular nationalist POV to push, so drop that nonsense right now. As for the content itself, the changes are based on a story at rt.com, the website of the Russian Times, which is known to be an unreliable source that pushes a pro-Russian POV. Not the first time they've tried this; see Talk:Borscht for a similar case from just under a year ago. That's why I reverted in the first place. I don't believe the source is valid. oknazevad (talk) 15:44, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Ok Oknazevad, I totally understand what you are saying. Atleast you can argument without deleting my comments without actually answering, respect for that. But could you answer my original question. Why is Poland placed as "first" in this article though it is widely known that vodka was invented in Russia (by regular people). I understand that you probably think it was invented in Poland and I respect your opinion, but at the moment we don't have enough evidence to say that it is a fact so I think it would be fair to place Russia first. Do you understand me? Jomlini (talk) 15:59, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Because the sources that are in the article place its invention in Poland (plus the word "vodka" actually entered English from Polish, not Russian). As we don't have a reliable source to counter that, that's what should remain; "widely known" is not enough, as people often make incorrect assumptions. To give another analogy, chili con carne. I've seen many people change the origin in the infobox at that article to "Mexico" because they just know it's from Mexico. But it's actually traced, as best as anyone can tell, to San Antonio, Texas, which is what the sources in the article state. So the article correctly states Texas as its origin. Similarly here, the article lists Poland first because the sources place its origin in Poland. If a reliable source can be found stating Russia, then maybe we change it, but first we need reliable sources. Just because you say everyone thinks it's from Russia (itself not proven) doesn't mean we make the same error. oknazevad (talk) 16:35, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

And I'm From Finland, why should I have a particular nationalistic POV to push? Jomlini (talk) 16:03, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

More a case of bad behavior, pushing something and edit warring instead of going to the talk page. And also, the unneeded assumptions about our nationalities. And the total non-sequitur about Judaism, which itself is a bad line to go towards. oknazevad (talk) 16:35, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Well you said that you are partially polish and Poeticbent is. But let's stop talking about ourselves, let's talk about this article. Can you answer my question? Jomlini (talk) 16:39, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Okay, folks, you've all thrashed each other quite enough about who is or who isn't a POV pusher or what is or isn't a nationalist source and who comes from which nationality. Boring. Let's get back to the (embarassingly trivial) issue: the name of this drink is evidently pretty much the same in all the countries it's produced in. There's no reason to burden the lead line with translations in all sorts of local languages when they're all trivially similar, and there certainly isn't any reason why the Polish one, of all things, ought to be there, let alone why it needs to be in first position. The only real factor in what we need in the lead line is: which language did English get the word from? – That language is, apparently, Russian [2], and therefore that is the only language that needs to be cited there. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:43, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Exactly Fut.Perf. That is a fact what no-one can deny. Jomlini (talk) 16:48, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

I removed text attributed to Gin Vodka Asociation as bullshit. There is no such real Russian town Khlynovsk and there is no 1174 Vyatka Chronicle. The town of Vyatka was established as Khlynov in 1181 as merchant's fort. Vyatka Chronicle is from 18th century. Also GVA does not provide refs to their wisdom. - üser:Altenmann >t 02:57, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

OK, I found out WTF was going on. Here is an except from the chronicle:

И егда во граде умножишася людие и поселились свободно, и тогда бояшеся нашествия супостатъ поставили острогъ кругомъ всего посаду, наченше съ полуденной стороны отъ глубокова рва где ныне выше винокурни словетъ Епиховъ потокъ и ведоша тотъ острогъ на северъ до глубокова рва, где ныне башня троеворотна

"And when in this town there became many people and they settled freely and then afraid of raids of enemies, they set a fortified fence (острогъ) around the settlement (посад), starting from the southern side from a deep moat where now above the distillery the Epikhov Stream flows and continuing this fence to the north until a deep moat where a three-side tower is now..."

I.e. the distillery mentioned was "now", i.e., in 18th century of the chronicle, not 12th century of Khlynov. Case closed. - üser:Altenmann >t 03:13, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

P.S. For a long time I've been suspecting the same bullshit about Sandomierz, but so far nobody provided the source of the authentic document to verify, so it is all hearsay of the interested side. - üser:Altenmann >t 03:16, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Maybe this will help. Home Production of Vodkas, Infusions & Liqueurs by Stanley Marianski, chapter History, page 107. ISBN 0983697345. The original text of Akta Grodzkie was written in Latin and the town was probably spelled Sandomiria (not Sandomierz, like today). I tried to locate this document online, however, the full genuine archive consists of LXXXIII volumes (I believe, that's 83). I don't know where to look for the relevant documents signed in 1405. Only the volume titles are writen in old Polish, the rest in like Chinese to me. The buck stops here. Poeticbent talk 05:09, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
I've seen statements of this kind aplenty. People copy from each other without hesitation. The Russian "Khlynovsk" nonsense is also in several books already. BTW wince the Acta are in Latin, I find it dubious that vodka/wodka would be written anything else but 'aq.vit.'. Also, I noticed Sandomiria often abbr. to 'Sandom.' in these 'Acta'. - üser:Altenmann >t 07:22, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

I very much agree with the removal of the "Gin and Vodka Association" website as a source. Unfortunately the entire sentence that it was used for is now left unsourced, as the claim "either in Poland in the 8th century, or in the area of today's Russia in the late 9th century" is not covered by the other source that remains. The claim is also extremely dubious, as according to the sources used at distilled beverage#True distillation, distilled beverages were only invented after the 12th century. (Plus, what kinds of sources could there possibly be about the first "documented" production from such a time period? There are virtually no original written sources from that period anyway.)

Once we're done weeding this kind of nonsense out, the whole article should be restructured to get away from the whole history-by-countries structure. Maybe this way the article can stop creating the embarassing impression as if the brainless national point-scoring exercise of "we were first!"/"No, we were first!" had been the main focus of attention of its authors. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:02, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

I totally agree with you Fut.Perf. Many of the sources don't meet the criteria of WP:VERIFY because they are in Polish. Didn't surprise me after seeing the people who are editing here and "defending" this article from POV pushing though ironically doing just that themselves. If I would add sources from Russian websites and claim that the vodka was invented in Russia, my edits would been reverted in seconds. I think this article should get restructured and neutralised. Poeticbent should also understand that if he wants to improve the article, he should join the conversation without deleting my comments. Glad that some people noticed this article. Thank you. Jomlini (talk) 12:59, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Being in a non-English language in no way makes a source unverifiable. That's actually against Wikipedia policy on sources. But if the sources themselves are not reliable, then they can and should be removed. Which is why I objected to your initial edits, because they were based on a known unreliable, biased source. oknazevad (talk) 14:08, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

(ec) Jomlini, you are still thinking of it all in terms of the national point-scoring game too; please stop doing that. And the language of any of our sources is quite irrelevant; they can be in Polish or Russian or Chinese, for that matter. What counts is that they reflect reliable, responsible scholarship (and when it comes to medieval attestations of words and the like, that means it should be publications by real historians, not self-styled food experts, manufacturers or the like.) Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:10, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

By the way, we're not currently using this [3] book, are we? Highly recommended reading. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:38, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Vodka. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130707024520/http://www.cocktailguiden.com:80/artiklar/explorer-vodka to http://www.cocktailguiden.com/artiklar/explorer-vodka

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 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).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:32, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Adding information on Ukrainian vodka

I have added information on Ukrainian vodka as Ukraine has played a huge role in the development of the drink and i think it belittles the country to use a photo of one their earliest distillers of vodka but not discuss their impact on the drink. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DanielLerish (talk • contribs) 07:14, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120215005220/http://www.alexstubb.com/artikkelit/bw_vodka.pdf to http://www.alexstubb.com/artikkelit/bw_vodka.pdf

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. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 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).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:35, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Jan Chryzostom Pasek

'The exact production methods were described in 1768 by Jan Paweł Biretowski and in 1774 by Jan Chryzostom Pasek.' Jan Chryzostom Pasek died in 1701. There seems to be some kind of a mix-up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.73.123.74 (talk) 09:26, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

I agree. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41grtlks (talk • contribs) 18:23, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

This should have been noted earlier. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41grtlks (talk • contribs) 18:25, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Percentage by weight

For the benefit of chemically oriented readers, the article should say what the percentages by volume mean in terms of percentage by mass (weight). --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 14:36, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

I would argue that that would be trivial, as distilled spirits are universally (and legally) defined in terms of alcohol by volume. The percentage by weight doesn't factor into it. It might be interesting to know, but it's not a chemistry article, so it's not important enough to include. oknazevad (talk) 16:44, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Place of origin reference

The very first reference (right under the opening image) to "Oxford Dictionaries" website actually states that vodka's place of origin is Russia. However it says Poland in the article. Since subject's place of origin is an ongoing debate we should probably remove "place of origin" information from the top of the article or change it to Russia (since that's what reference says). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.3.202.224 (talk) 21:59, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Second reference is not a reliable source, leaving Poland as the oldest recorded origin Seerofrtruth (talk) 10:17, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Kievan Rus' in the 16th Century?

I'm not sure what's ultimately meant by this statement: "The word vodka written in Cyrillic appeared first in 1533, in relation to a medicinal drink brought from Poland to Russia by the merchants of Kievan Rus'.[10]," but Kievan Rus' hadn't existed for two or three centuries in 1533. Mpaniello (talk) 15:14, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

@Oknazevad

When you try to label editings as something, look better at your actions first and than talk again. When you are on Wikipedia and have respect to culture, you better be more objective and don't try to push hard into a corner which represents only a fragment of many. Anyone who tries here to make Russia's role smaller as it is, clearly ignores Russia's connection to the vodka brand and the perception worldwide. In fact you trie to manipulate the global perception and try to unlink it from Russia more to the west (Poland). And it's done here in a very exaggerated way which is not tolerable. If you do not like the editings, then you should become more sensitive and give the theme more respect.--85.212.110.65 (talk) 08:10, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

I'd advise you to actually read the article references and the talk page archives. Maybe you'd be surprised to find out what you thought you knew is actually wrong. I know I was when I read them. Wikipedia is not here to reinforce your preconceptions. PS, I don't like vodka anyway. I'm a bourbon guy. oknazevad (talk) 20:36, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

so your viewpoint is that this article should be not really objective, but should be viewed from a western viewpoint ? that's how it sounds to me ! why ? because it's a attempt to minimize Russias role in vodka history and also the manipulation of worldwide actual perception. it's also not only about sources. btw there are many different sources and they are even proof that this article is even less objective - keyword: medicine and another term for alcohol in poland, but that's another point. but now let's talk about more than sources. the picture with Russian vodka for example should be placed very high considering Russias role in vodka popularization and that has nothing to do with sources at all.

i think the solution could be to make two different articles then, one for polish vodka ( btw present vodka was not called vodka back then in poland ) and one Russian vodka. this article takes the old russian term for alcohol - vodka - but places another claimant in a exaggerated way on the top. when you really think that this is ok, then i think you don't understand this subject and also the picture behind it. people are very aware of such things. in general the western world and wikipedia has a long way to go to even understand that there exist other viewpoints in the world, in Russia, in Islam, in Asia. what i've seen in behavior is that this article is not even ready to make it even a little more objectively. just wow about that. sharing means being more modest --85.212.208.174 (talk) 12:40, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

...not to sound like an over-sensitive ultranationalist or anything. Mpaniello (talk) 15:18, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 August 2021

This edit request to Vodka has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

For type, capitalize the "A" in "alcoholic beverage" to make it more in line with the rest of the content. 174.96.143.49 (talk) 05:16, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Done ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 05:21, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Cognac?

In the first sentence of the section "Poland", the reference to "cognac" should surely be to "brandy", cognac being a specific variety from a specific region of France. --87.115.226.176 (talk) 09:07, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

You'd be amazed how much variation there is even within that region, largely does to the different producers and the different grape varieties used. I think the sentence reads fine as is. oknazevad (talk) 14:38, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jhread.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:31, 17 January 2022 (UTC)