Talk:McAfee's Benchmark

Spirits Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spirits, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spirits or Distilled beverages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpiritsWikipedia:WikiProject SpiritsTemplate:WikiProject SpiritsSpirits articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Spirits WikiProject task list:

This list is transcluded from the tasks page, to edit it click here.

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Spirits:

Tagging all articles that fall under our scope with {{WikiProject Spirits}} and assessing their quality and importance to the project.

"Old Benchmark"

At one point Sazerac was marketing a more "popular-price" version of this called "Old Benchmark". Does anyone have any reliable source references to this fact? 2600:1004:B15E:718B:91EA:BD55:8355:3334 (talk) 00:35, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Marketing as a less expensive alternative to Jack Daniel's

More than five years ago, someone (specifically, Craiglduncan) added a paragraph to the article that contained a statement saying "Buffalo Trace has packaged McAfee's Benchmark similar to Jack Daniels and markets it as less expensive alternative to the Tennessee Whiskey", citing the 2006 edition of Jim Murray's Whisky Bible. Ever since then, various editors (most of whom clearly have some WP:COI perspective in attempting to promote Sazerac Company products, or are brand-new accounts with no edit history, or are anonymous IP editors) have repeatedly tried to remove that statement from the article – without providing any explanation of why they want to remove it, or while providing some off-target rationale. Now I notice that in February, someone (another new account with no edit history, who has since only edited articles that discuss Sazerac and its products) added a new remark within the citation, saying that "but in neither review is there any mention of Benchmark being packaged similarly to Jack Daniel's, nor is there any mention of Buffalo Trace marketing it as such." Although this looks like another probable WP:COI editor, if they are correct about that statement, then the cited source does not support the statement.

Does Jim Murray's 2006 Whisky Bible actually say that? I don't have a copy of that book.

Perhaps the citation was meant to just generally support the history description contained in the whole paragraph, not that specific statement. If the cited source does not support the statement, and we can't find another source that does support it, then we should remove the statement.

—BarrelProof (talk) 19:26, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I do actually have a copy of Jim Murray's 2006 Whisky Bible, and I stand by my statement that nowhere in it does it say that Buffalo Trace markets Benchmark as a less expensive alternative to JD. I would have no problem whatsoever with the entire reference being removed from the article, since "Buffalo Trace has packaged McAfee's Benchmark similar to Jack Daniels and markets it as less expensive alternative to the Tennessee Whiskey" is not supported by the source stated by Craiglduncan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 6620MillCreek (talk • contribs) 19:38, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, I've removed the statement from the article. While I have your attention, I wonder if you could verify the statement in the lead section that says the brand is "aged 'at least 36 months' according to its label". I have looked at several pictures of the bottles, and I haven't seen that statement on them, and I haven't seen age descriptions in the on-line reviews that I've found (so far). Also, I wonder whether some brand expressions are aged for a different amount of time than others. Is that statement true? —BarrelProof (talk) 19:47, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I found a different source that supports the statement about Jack Daniel's. There is a review that says "Sazerac/Buffalo Trace markets it as a cheaper alternative to Jack Daniel's and it shows in the Old No. 8 on the black label." The "Old No. 8" is an interesting aspect to note, as the Jack Daniel's labels say "Old No. 7" (also in white letters on a black label, although that's not necessarily so uncommon – e.g., as with Evan Williams, as someone pointed out previously).

It also says "Age: At least 3 years".

See Fodano, Thomas (September 17, 2014). "Benchmark Old No. 8 Bourbon Review". Bourbon & Banter. Retrieved August 12, 2016.

But since that article was written in 2014, maybe his source was this Wikipedia article. I don't really know whether to consider that article to be a reliable source or not.

—BarrelProof (talk) 20:39, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]