Talk:Malagos Chocolate

Hello! I think the reception section should be changed into Accolades because it focused more, if not 100% to awards. The definition of reception is "the way in which a person or group of people reacts to someone or something", which is more "crowd reviews" or reviews themselves instead of Accolades (an award or privilege granted as a special honor or as an acknowledgment of merit, more-so awards). Pinging the only other contributor, @Hariboneagle927:. Thanks, 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 11:48, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Nominator: TheNuggeteer (talk · contribs) 01:42, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

GA review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Malagos Chocolate/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Whonting (talk · contribs) 08:46, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi TheNuggeteer, I'm looking forward to reviewing this article -- Philippines articles on chocolate have a look of potential and it's great to see you developing them.

On the first look through, I think the article can do with a bit of work before the review proper begins. The prose in a few places is careless, particularly outside the lede, for instance:

• The chocolate is then made in a factory, where it is made into chocolate.

• Reworded

• She enjoyed the dancing in the trade fair and others showing their products, but she said to her daughter that she could make "it [chocolate] at home". Why but? Why others when she wasn't showing products?

• She visited the fair; she wasn't there to sell.
  • This should be clearer in the text - Whonting

• The resulting chocolate was found to have a silky flavor. Silky is a texture rather than flavor.

• Silky is a synonym of "smooth", "soft", and "lustrous". All three are used to describe flavors, so silky can be used too.
  • Ah I see where you're coming from. Synonyms have similar meanings, though not exact, and it is awkward and strange as a native English speaker to read silky mouthfeel described as taste here. Can you look at substituting for a synonym or clarifying it is mouthfeel? - Whonting

• Tablea is never linked or explained.

• Fixed

Tried my best to scan the article and find issues.

Apart from this, the article has a promotional tone in places. The sources are often promotional, and sometimes unacceptable (Can The Philippines Make Premium Chocolate? This Chocolatier is Betting On It is unreliable under WP:FORBESCON, Cocoa Runners is a craft chocolate retailer selling the chocolate and can't be used to source positive claims such as "Since then, the two brands have had a close working relationship".), which you should not allow to impact the article. Some examples:

Removed the Forbes source and removed the biased claim of Cocoa Runners. I have also marked the latter as a primary source. The other sources seem reliable and I have fixed all promotional issues I can see.

• The company was founded from an idea by founder Charita Puentespina. This has a promotional tone, and redundant (all companies require someone to have an idea before starting). It would be more helpful to introduce who Charita is.

• Reworded

• According to the founder, the brand is being shipped to Canada for them to experience locally produced chocolate. It is unclear from the text what "locally produced chocolate" is, and you can articulate the founder's ideas without using their promotional language.

• Reworded

• The awards section should be summarizing the awards that have been received, rather than listing them. Many awards are not notable and mentions of wins only appear in local publications.

• Removed non-important awards and awards that use local sources.

Some issues with text source integrity and accuracy also exist:

• Originally, they made domestic chocolate - they made chocolate for a domestic audience, domestic chocolate is not an established concept.

• Reworded

• They also started importing in Thailand and Singapore in 2017. The source, from April 2017 says "They have also recently started exporting to Thailand". This does not mean 2017.

• Fixed

• Malagos uses Grade A cacao beans of the Trinitario variety, which comes from a hybrid of Forastero and Criollo. Such a taxonomy has been debunked - from our article Types of cocoa beans: "recent genetic research has found that the categories of Forastero and Triniario are better understood as geohistorical inventions rather than as having a botanical basis. They are still used frequently in marketing material."

• Removed

The points above are examples, rather than exhaustive; you should address the general problems being described rather than just those listed. Ping me when the article is ready for the full review and I'll give it another go over. Whonting (talk) 08:46, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

As an experiment, I have run User:Alaexis/AI Source Verification over this review, which didn't really work - it could apparently only access five sources. Of these, (from this revision):

• [18] did not verify its claims, and doesn't appear reliable
• [35] supports In April 2015, it was awarded for the Best Unflavoured Drinking Chocolate (bronze), and another recognition in the following year (silver)., yet it was published in 2015. How can it be talking about awards won in 2016?
• [36] doesn't appear to support the claims it makes (bronze?)
• [38] doesn't talk about 2018
• [41] doesn't mention USDA, and needs a better application of MOS:DATED, and better clarification whether this is the 15th farm or the 16th.
• Apart from this, I note that the infobox links liquor - I assume this is meant to link cocoa liquor, which is not liquor despite its name.

Whonting (talk) 04:07, 12 April 2026 (UTC)