Jump to content

Talk:Now and Later

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Non-encyclopedic description in intro

[edit]

The introductory paragraphs to this entry, as they're now written, don't seem very encyclopedic. The writer dwells on the minutia of the "Now and Later" name, describing in painful detail how the taffy can be eaten now or at some point in the future. I find it obnoxious and would suggest someone edit this article to be more fact-based, rather than juvenile, tongue in cheek. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.150.27.130 (talk) 19:15, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unwarranted deletions of passages for matters of personal taste are "juvenile." If you are going to cite a lack of facticity in your justification for deletions, then please also provide evidence for how your revision adds to the semantic truth-value of the overall article. What you are doing is tantamount to vandalism and trolling, otherwise. (69.204.126.97 (talk) 02:43, 17 December 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Quite the contrary, my edits/deletions were well within the scope of WIkipedia guidelines. I was trying to bring the article up to Wikipedia standards: 

   * be clear. Avoid esoteric or quasi-legal terms and dumbed-down language. Be plain, direct, unambiguous, and specific.
     Avoid platitudes and generalities. Do not be afraid to tell editors directly that they must or should do something.
   * be as concise as possible—but no more concise. Verbosity is not a reliable defense against misinterpretation. 
     Omit needless words.
   * emphasize the spirit of the rule. Expect editors to use common sense.

- I removed language that could clearly be defined as esoteric and written in platitudes. For example: "adding yet another dimension to the nominally prescribed temporal schematic of this confection..." "...the interval bound by a gradual softening of the candy through a sustained exposure to saliva and the culminating act of swallowing..." That entire paragraph needed to be shortened. The person who wrote this paragraph did so to mock the reader, not inform. They cited no references. None of their claims could be verified. In short, they typed a bizarre, uncited passage merely for the amusement of watching themselves type. I was well within the letter and spirit of Wikipedia's guidelines in deleting this nonsense.

Further, the description of the process of eating candy serves no purpose in an encyclopedia article. If you view the pages for Skittles, cookies, toffee, or any number of other confections, you will not find a description of how to eat them or a detailed and fictional/uncited account of how the human eating and digestion process is relevant to the name of the product.

My edits were in no way, shape or form vandalism. I followed proper procedure by bringing the issue to the discussion area before making edits to the article. My edits were not heavy handed.

If you intend to keep the painfully detailed and mocking description of the process of eating a piece of taffy, it needs to be cited/referenced and some sort of rational justification needs to be made for its inclusion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.150.27.130 (talk) 14:23, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll ask again - if you intend to maintain an entry, there needs to be valid rationale for its inclusion. That means citing your reference properly. If not, I will continue to edit this entry to conform to the Wikipedia quality guidelines. If you disagree, please offer an explanation as to why here on this discussion page. That's why we're all here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.150.27.130 (talk) 19:08, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—whether readers can check that material in Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true. Where is your reference/citation? Without it, all of this gibberish you're restoring is unverifiable and should not be included in a Wikipedia entry. I will continue to delete until you cite properly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikeroth2012 (talk • contribs) 19:14, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Per Wikipedia guidelines: The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. You may remove any material lacking a reliable source that directly supports it (although an alternate procedure would be to add a citation needed tag). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikeroth2012 (talk • contribs) 19:24, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Verification?

[edit]

I removed this paragraph from the article because I couldn't find any verification of the information. Please provide a source before returning it.

Jeff Jensen, Mike Spinner, Clint Saulsberry; Ian Williamson, and Michael Phillips make up the team of youngsters that came up with the Chewy Now and Later candy. They have all surpassed the million dollar mark in the marketing development industry. Each individual had a net worth of $500,000.00 or more before the age of 21.

-- Joyous | Talk 00:18, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Etan 23:08, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And I removed it again.

Verdafolio

I can't find any statements online regarding the relationship between Now & Laters and Starbursts. The claim seems a bit absurd and not worth mentioning in an encyclopedic article. I'm removing that section. Perhaps a category of taffy-like candies would be more appropriate. Verdatum 16:53, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

April Fool's verification

[edit]

Will someone verify that those three flavors were April Fool's limited releases, and what year they were released? If you know, you can use this text to redo it for simplicity's sake, since I saw "Broiled Salmon" and thought someone vandalized the page.

Flavors

[edit]


There were also three flavors released for April Fools' Day, (INSERT YEAR HERE):

  • Broiled Salmon
  • Chicken-Fried Steak
  • Huevos Rancheros

I just checked an online retailer (farleys and sathers) of N&L and found the follow flavors are currently available. Wondering where everyone else is getting their flavor lists:

  • Apple
  • Banana
  • Black Radberry
  • Blueberry
  • Blue Radberry
  • Bubble Gum
  • Cherry
  • Cherry Apple
  • Grape
  • Kiwi Kollapse
  • Lime
  • Orange
  • Peach Smash
  • Peppermint
  • Pineapple
  • Pink Lemonade
  • Red Radberry
  • Red White and Blueberry
  • Strawberry
  • Strawberry-Banana
  • Tingleberry
  • Thriller
  • Tropical Lemonade
  • Tropical Punch
  • Watermelon
  • Mango Melon


Category:Confectionery Category:Farley's & Sathers brands Category:1962 introductions

More Flavors

[edit]

There were some more flavors than those that are listed...off hand I remember chocolate, vanilla, cotton candy, lemonade...etc. Shouldnt all of the flavors whether they still exsist or not, be mentioned? PeAchBaCon 19:32, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


I once ripped out a tooth that wasn't loose by chewing on a Now and Later in 3rd grade. No joke.

Company of Ownership?

[edit]

The article states:

However after the buyout by Beatrice Foods in 2006 the flavors were changed to the more PR-Friendly Strawberry, Apple and Grape.

But according to the Wikipedia article on Beatrice Foods, this company is defunct and all remaining operations were acquired by ConAgra in the early 90s. According to the Farley's & Sathers website (http://www.farleysandsathers.com/about/whoweare.asp), the Now and Later brand was acquired by them in 2002. Is there verification that Beatrice is still in business? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jalapenoplopper (talk • contribs) 08:42, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Citation verification

[edit]

"Now And Later's has many of the same properties as DDT" doesn't this need a citation and verification. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.94.251.19 (talk) 19:17, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fortnightly Club quote - cannot locate

[edit]

There is a quote from the Fortnightly Club of Redwood from 1978. I was trying to add references and can't find any mention of Now and Laters on their website. [[1]]

There are some articles with vague names that might be the one quoted here - but there do not appear to be any links to the actual articles - in spite of the website stating that such papers are available to the public. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Umfundisi (talk • contribs) 04:04, 6 January 2013 (UTC) Umfundisi (talk) 12:53, 6 January 2013 (UTC) (sorry forgot to sign ... but the robot did it for me)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Now and Later. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:42, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Potential Vandalism In 'Flavors' Section, And Prevention

[edit]

The section of the article that lists flavors is full of garbage like "Corn", "Pennies", and "Bread". It used to be a lot worse, with flavors like "Aryan Avocado" and "Auschwitz Apple"

The Flavors section needs some kind of citation or something linking to an official online source that lists the flavors. Due to this company's history of pretending to release joke flavors such as "Broiled Salmon" on April Fool's, it's hard to know what constitutes vandalism and what is an April Fool's joke.

On a similar note I move that confirmed April Fool's flavors either be removed from the article altogether, or be given their own list alongside the confirmed Current and Discontinued flavors.

Utolso Nyoma (talk) 16:59, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Now and Later. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 08:37, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Now_and_Later&oldid=1204350362"