Jump to content

Talk:Grapico

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleGrapico has been listed as one of the Agriculture, food and drink good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 2, 2008Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on July 23, 2008.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that, despite its name, the soft drink Grapico, first sold in 1914, did not contain any grape juice and used deceptive advertising to promote the product?

Newman or Newnan, Georgia?

[edit]

Should Newman, Georgia be Newnan, Georgia? I think the town in Georgia may be a typographical error. Please verify. Chris (talk) 12:56, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah it should be Newnan. Thanks for the correction — Navy  Blue  formerly iDosh 17:13, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

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


GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


This is a great article and I think it should be considered for FA nomination. I only have one comment, which is below.

I agree, I will try to improve the lead section. — Navy  Blue  formerly iDosh 17:06, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    I think the first paragraph needs more recent context. Example: Grapico is a caffeine free, artificially flavored carbonated soft drink with a purple color and a grape taste 'that sold over 10 million units last year' or 'is sold in over thirty states.'
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

Lead was improved. Again, this is just a great article and really deserves to be put up for FA. --Patrick (talk) 17:08, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • In my opinion this article is drenched in original research. The amount of work done to compile the research is admirable, but it belongs somewhere else where it can be reviewed before it passes muster as "verifiable" on Wikipedia. The court cases, trademark applications and incorporation papers establish certain facts, but they don't necessarily paint the picture that the author is giving us here (for example; whether establishing an advertising account or being taxed indicates a particular measure of success). The significance of the details about Grossman's Sons previous business ventures and the proximity of Rochell's offices to the Buffalo Rock plant are unexplained and, like the bunches of grapes on the first bottles, imply the presence of an ingredient --interpretation-- that isn't really here. Furthermore the level of detail presented for things that can be found on the internet (filings and court cases, for example) undoubtedly distorts the picture by leaving out so much that is not so easily uncovered. Again, what we are missing is the treatment that would be given to this research by a historian publishing in a professionally-reviewed medium. My advice would be to pull back on the excess detail, as befits a general-interest encyclopedia, and to look for more secondary sources. --Dystopos (talk) 21:45, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Grapico. 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.

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 21:45, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why is there not any Diet grapico drinks in the stores for us people that can't have regular drinks.

[edit]

Why is there not any Diet grapico Drinks in the stores for people who can't drink regularly grapico's. 174.215.145.23 (talk) 10:20, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]