Sources & Confidence

How to read this site

Mexican spirits are a living and, in places, contested field. Denominations of origin evolve, regulations change, historical records are fragmentary, and producers do not always agree on how their own categories are defined. This site takes that reality seriously: it does not present certainty where debates exist, and it does not smooth over uncertainty to make text sound more definitive.

So that the reader always knows how to weigh a claim, every detail page carries an editorial confidence label. Below is what each one means.

The four confidence labels

High. The claim is well established. At least two solid, independent sources agree, consensus is clear, and there is no sign of active dispute. This may be a documented historical fact, an officially published regulatory datum, or a peer-reviewed scientific result.

Medium. The claim is supported, but with some uncertainty. It may rely on a single strong source, incomplete historical records, or a consensus that is not yet fully uniform. The reader can treat the information as probably correct, with awareness that it may be refined.

Low. Evidence is thin. The claim is plausible and reflects the best available material in the literature or oral sources, but it is not corroborated enough to stand with confidence. The reader should treat it as provisional.

Disputed. Sources disagree, or the claim is the subject of active controversy among producers, regulators, researchers, or other interested parties. This label never appears alone: it always carries at least one citation the reader can follow to understand what the disagreement is about.

“Disputed” always shows its sources

The “disputed” label is the most demanding of the four because it names a live disagreement. A disputed claim without a source would be circular: it would ask the reader to accept the existence of a controversy without giving them the means to verify it.

For that reason, every claim marked “disputed” on this site includes at least one citation the reader can consult. In many cases it includes several, precisely to show the different sides of the disagreement.

Where the facts come from

Sources used by this site include peer-reviewed academic texts on botany, history, and chemistry; official regulations and denomination-of-origin resolutions; specialist publications on spirits; historical archive records; producer and maestro interviews and statements; and open databases such as NOM registries and certified-producer listings.

Each detail page lists its sources at the bottom. This is not an inventory of everything consulted; it is the set of sources that directly support the specific claims made on that page. The goal is that the reader can follow any piece of information back to its origin without having to ask.

Where a source is openly available online, the link points directly to it. Where it is a book or a restricted-access article, it is cited with enough detail to be locatable. Oral sources are identified as such.

Fairness to producers and brands

Some claims about specific producers are sensitive: additive use, disputes over production methods, labeling controversies, ownership changes. This site treats them with particular care.

Allegations about specific practices are presented as attributed allegations, not as established facts, unless they are independently confirmed with enough certainty to carry a high-confidence label. They are never used to attack a producer or as a rhetorical starting point. Where a brand has publicly responded to a controversy, that response is reflected too.

The goal is not empty neutrality but attributed precision: stating exactly what the sources say, neither adding nor subtracting, and leaving the reader the means to form their own judgment.

Two languages

This site is written entirely in English and in Spanish. Both versions are produced to the same standard of rigor and editorial care; they are not machine translations or simplified versions of each other. Where technical terminology differs between languages, the difference is noted. Where the context of a claim varies by audience, the writing accounts for it.

Much of the literature on Mexican spirits exists only in Spanish, and much of the international audience interested in the subject reads primarily in English. The only way to be faithful to both sides of the material is to write in both languages with equal seriousness.