Template:Did you know nominations/Boost Drinks
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: withdrawn by nominator, closed by Pamzeis (talk) 13:59, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Boost Drinks
... that Boost Drinks was originally known as Blast UK Limited?Source: 1- ALT1: ... that Boost Drinks sold a limited edition grape and cherry flavour known as Cosmic Glow? Source: 2
ALT2: ... that Boost Drinks is the official energy drinks partner of Leeds United?Source: 3- ALT3: ... that Boost Drinks attempted to introduce smoothies alongside their energy drinks range but the response was disappointing and it was soon abandoned? Source: 4
- ALT4: ... that Boost Drinks is in charge of the sales and marketing of soft drinks brand Rio? Source: 5
- ALT5: ... that Boost Drinks, which primarily sells energy and sports drinks, introduced an iced coffee range in 2020? Source: 6
5x expanded by Sahaib3005 (talk). Self-nominated at 13:59, 14 October 2021 (UTC).
- General eligibility:
- New enough:
- Long enough:
- Other problems:
Policy compliance:
- Adequate sourcing:
- Neutral:
- Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:
- Other problems:
Hook eligibility:
- Cited:
- Interesting:
- Other problems:
| QPQ: Done. |
Overall: 
@Sahaib3005: ALT0 is not interesting, ALT2 inadvertently sounds like an advert (WP:DYKNOT; it would require a rework if you want that hook). ALT1 is the one that reads OK. The article received a Boost and was nominated on time. Although your user page marks 3 DYKs, according to this, you need a QPQ. The copyvio detector says "36.3%" but it's just a quote. Everything else seems fine. (CC) Tbhotch™ 04:23, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
@Tbhotch:, I have now reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/Something That May Shock and Discredit You. Sahaib3005 (talk) 07:07, 24 October 2021 (UTC) I have also added more hooks. Sahaib3005 (talk) 14:41, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
QPQ done. Newers ALTs reviewed. I found ALT5 to be the most interesting, followed by 4, 3 and 1. 2 is still the hookiest, but it needs not to sound like something you would hear while watching a match. (CC) Tbhotch™ 19:51, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
Sahaib3005 I have pulled this from prep 5 for further discussion per issues about interestingness and promotional content that was brought up on the DYK talk page. SL93 (talk) 18:35, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
- Are we actually sure this business is notable? Nearly every source seems like it could have been written from a press release, and most of them are niche industry publications. The two that are from the Times and Yorkshire Post are about the company CEO, not the company. —valereee (talk) 19:45, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
@Valereee:, Boost is the UK's second largest energy drinks brand. (Sources 1, 2, 3) Sahaib3005 (talk) 19:56, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
- Sahaib3005, then there should be coverage about the company rather than simply short reports of their financial statuses, hires, backers, price increases, distribution deals, sponsorships, etc. There should be coverage of the company, their history, etc. Non-industry/non-local media should be talking about them. Are there three of these sources you'd point to as significant coverage that isn't just local/industry niche publications? —valereee (talk) 20:22, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
- Pushing ourselves to place our currency where our food-opening lies, i'd say that if we don't think it's notable, we should be considering pushing it through AfD and reconvening when it's over. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 08:06, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
- Sahaib3005, then there should be coverage about the company rather than simply short reports of their financial statuses, hires, backers, price increases, distribution deals, sponsorships, etc. There should be coverage of the company, their history, etc. Non-industry/non-local media should be talking about them. Are there three of these sources you'd point to as significant coverage that isn't just local/industry niche publications? —valereee (talk) 20:22, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
- Theleekycauldron I'm having a hard time doing a reasonable WP:BEFORE because there's a major brand of nutritional drinks in the US that is also named Boost; it's at Boost (drink). When I search, most of what I come up with is this other company. I was hoping Sahaib, who is in the UK, might have better luck finding actual significant coverage, but yeah, at this point I'm not seeing notability. The simple fact a company is the second-biggest in their category isn't enough, and the sources given above for that don't even look like RS. Foodbevg.com is an online directory, imagecreativeuk.com is the company's design agency, and onlinecashandcarry.com is an online retailer. We can AfD it to get other opinions; maybe others will disagree with me. But maybe Sahaib can quickly find some significant coverage of the company? —valereee (talk) 13:32, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
- Hm, it's already been AfD'd once, and that was before the recent additions. I'm not going to push it any further, but man there's a lot of bad sourcing in this article. —valereee (talk) 15:55, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
- I'm having the same issue to, to be honest—but I'm not finding any coverage, ambiguity or otherwise. I might take this to AfD myself. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 16:49, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
- Hm, it's already been AfD'd once, and that was before the recent additions. I'm not going to push it any further, but man there's a lot of bad sourcing in this article. —valereee (talk) 15:55, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
@Sahaib3005, Valereee, and Theleekycauldron: the AfD closed as "no consensus". Pamzeis (talk) 03:23, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Sahaib3005: I really am sorry for the way I've chosen to hold this nomination up, it's dragging on much longer than i ever meant it to—but with the notability requirement settled, we can circle back to the original question of promotionality. I'm not sure we have a great hook or article in terms of puffery here—what do you want to do? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 09:59, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Theleekycauldron:, unless someone objects, I think it is best to close the dyk nomination because of the promotional concerns. Sahaib3005 (talk) 12:08, 15 November 2021 (UTC)