From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This article uses US spelling[edit]

The first spelling used in this article was US, and it has consistently used US (or mixed) spelling during its entire history. Per WP:RETAIN, editors should not change the spelling. VMS Mosaic (talk) 10:17, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

A more significant instance of US bias is the bizarre claim that "Despite American trade sanctions against Cuban products, cigars remain one of the country's leading exports". There are other countries in the world that can and do import Cuban cigars, although Americans (or rather Americans living in the USA, not Americans of the Cuban variety) do often seem to overlook the existence of an outside world!Royalcourtier (talk) 10:07, 4 October 2014 (UTC)


This is an article about cigars, but cigars are not significantly different from cigarettes. There should be a clearer definition, and reference to cigarettes.Royalcourtier (talk) 10:10, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Are there as many fake Cuban cigars in Cuba as there is in the United States? What is the difference between real and fake? Jeff $essions (talk) 20:09, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Families in the cigar industry[edit]

I congratulate you on the re-written article, much better. But I strongly feel that this sub-section is seriously lacking in mentioning ANY of the famous Cuban cigar families. Also there is no mention in the article about the proposed lifting of the US embargo.Manxwoman (talk) 18:15, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

I was under the impression that most of the Cuban cigar families fled Cuba when Castro took control. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:14, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

No, far from it. But some did open other cigar factories in the Dominican Republic and others in the US misled people that they were or had been long-standing Cuban cigar families. Manxwoman (talk) 19:36, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Heath Effects portion needs work - some quantification[edit]

Jsusky (talk) 00:55, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Most in the West realize that all aspects of tobacco are influenced by politics. Wikipedia need not be so influenced. Important principles here include:

"Encyclopedic content must be verifiable."

"Neutral point of view"

The following addresses only the Health Effects section of the entry, wherein the thesis statement is:

"Like other forms of tobacco use, cigar smoking poses a significant health risk depending on dosage."

This statement is so trivial that it is essentially useless.

(like this statement - "commuting to work poses a significantly elevated risk of injury or death")

Further the statement implies, without evidence, that the risks are comparable to that for cigarette consumption.

"The risk of dying from any cause is statistically greater for cigar smokers than for people who have never smoked"

So, what are the statistics? What is the risk, bounded by suitable qualifications and context (inhale/not, cigars consumed/yr, cigar volumes/sizes, etc.)?

"current cigar users have shown a statistically significant, elevated mortality risk for cancers of the mouth, lungs, and larynx and a moderately elevated risk for cancer of the esophagus."

Same question - cite the stats, cite the quantity of elevated risk.

"When cigar smokers don't inhale or smoke few cigars per day, the risks are only slightly above those of never smokers. Risks of lung cancer increase with increasing inhalation and with increasing number of cigars smoked per day, but the effect of inhalation is more powerful than that for number of cigars per day. When 5 or more cigars are smoked per day and there is moderate inhalation, the lung cancer risks of cigar smoking approximate those of a one pack per day cigarette smoker. As the tobacco smoke exposure of the lung in cigar smokers increases to approximate the frequency of smoking and depth of inhalation found in cigarette smokers, the difference in lung cancer risks produced by these two behaviors disappears."

This, at least, is not trivial - but would be improved with some properly qualified figures with context.

All excellent points. I concur. Manxwoman (talk) 19:37, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cigar. 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.

As of 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 the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • 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) 19:45, 7 August 2017 (UTC)