Talk:List of Procter & Gamble brands/Archives/2014

Palm oil

It would be very helpful if someone could list the brands of Procter & Gamble products which contain palm oil. P&G deals with palm oil producers who use the primitive slash and burn technique of agriculture. This technique is destroying the habitat of orangutans, tigers and other endangered species. Some of these farmers are said to actively kill orangutans, since, if there were no orangutans, people might not object to their farming practice. A list of P&G products containing palm oil would make it easier for people who don't wish to participate in the destruction of our tropical forests, or endangered species, to avoid these products. This might also prevent some people from boycotting environmentally friendly P&G products.Dougc-3 (talk) 17:08, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

If it would be helpful for your cause, feel free to create such a list on some other site. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Without substantial coverage in independent reliable sources discussing which P&G products contain palm oil, we have nothing to cite and no indication that the topic is notable. For comparison, we could just as easily create a list of P&G products that contain whole wheat flour, are sold in boxes or have the letter C in their name. It would be possible to make arguments of a similar nature for each of these lists (I, for one, would like to eliminate the letter C in favor of unambiguous use of K's or S's). Should an organiazation of any size get behind your goal, they will likely create such a list themselves in any case. - SummerPhD (talk) 17:45, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Untitled

what are the things that p&g use to make the con sumer satisfied?

Only they know.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 13:15, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

"Brands by type of product"

This is a bizarrely organized section. First, there is "The 9 Pillars of P&G" section. In addition to all of the style problems with the section title, this is clearly not a product type. As there is no explanation/source for these being P&G's "pillar" brands, I'm killing the section. If this list is well known as a concept, it should be explained (and sourced) in the prose.

Next up is "Coconut-based cleaning and food products". If P&G is well known for extensive use of coconut as an ingredient, this might belong in the prose. "Cleaning products" is a type of product. "Food" is a type of product. Two types of products, selected by one ingredient and Frankensteined together do not become a new type of product. Soda, spray cleaner, paint and plant food do not belong in the same category by virtue of being water-based. Without a source discussing this, "coconut-based" is just as odd. (If Jif peanut butter is coconut-based, I'm a box of paperclips.)

"Dishwashing and fabric care" is either two categories or "cleaning products".

"Health care" is being misused here. If maxi pads and such (Always, etc.) are "health care", I don't seewhere they would likely be grouped how disposable diapers (Pampers) are "Laundry, personal care, and hair care".

Why "laundry" is with "personal care" and "hair care" instead of "fabric care" is beyond me.

I am tearing these lists apart into one list and grouping them into a reasonable number of categories. I will select categories based on how they would be grouped in a big box retailer. - SummerPhD (talk) 14:20, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Wow, that was fun. - SummerPhD (talk) 22:28, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Next up: Why so many lists?

So, we have "Brands with net sales of more than US$1 billion annually", which is three years old and uses the random cut off of $1 billion in U.S. dollars. For brands not in that category (which includes Gillette twice, but maybe that's two different product lines under that name...?), we have "Other current brand details". Hopefully anyone adding a brand to one of those lists removes it from the other one, but I wouldn't bet on it. If you're looking for a particular brand, be sure to check both of those lists. Oh, and check the other lists as well: "Divested brands", "Discontinued brands" and "By product type". Some products are on several lists and shouldn't be. Some should be on several lists, but are on just one. I'm thinking of merging all of them into one sortable table. By doing so, we can eliminate the redundancy while including all of the information from the existing lists. Thoughts? - SummerPhD (talk) 22:35, 22 September 2014 (UTC)