Template:Did you know nominations/Heinz Baked Beanz
- The following discussion 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: promoted by Allen3 talk 10:34, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Heinz Baked Beanz
[edit]... that some Heinz Baked Beanz made in 2001 have been scientifically proven to contain a hormone disruptor?
Created/expanded by Rcsprinter123 (talk). Self nom at 15:18, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
- hook reference is dead. - Theornamentalist (talk) 05:02, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
- I've updated it to the current link and added some more to back it up. Rcsprinter (constabulary) @ 17:19, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
- As it stands, the article is not "complete" per Rule D7. The subject is certainly deserving of an article, but this one only mentions the opening of factories, a 1967 advertising jingle, and a 2001 allegation of BPA. Surely the brand has sales statistics, recipe information, and other information typical of brand names? Also, much of the text (sourced to footnotes 1 and 3) is sourced to the company's own website instead of secondary sources. And the hook ref takes up only one sentence in the article. Surely there is more to say about it, and surely the company defended itself in some way?
- Since the information about the opening of factories was stated twice in this short article, I moved it into one paragraph. This leaves the article with just over 1500 characters (1565 to be exact). I will be happy to re-review when more content is added to flesh out the page.
- Note: This DYK review is being applied against the QPQ requirement for Template:Did you know nominations/Apollo 11 lunar sample display, Apollo 17 lunar sample display. Yoninah (talk) 23:07, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
I consider that both the hook and the article contravene NPOV. I have edited the article to give a more balanced view and think the hook is unsuitable because it gives a false impression. I suggest the following alternative hooks: - Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:45, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
- ALT1 ... that in 2008, Heinz Baked Beans became "Heinz Beanz" because the company thought the original name "a bit of a mouthful"?
- ALT2
... that Heinz Baked Beanz was considered an "essential food" in wartime Britain?
Thank you, Cwmhiraeth, for fixing this up and adding a secondary reference. I think the article is now at the "start" stage and is ready for DYK. New enough, long enough, well-referenced, no close paraphrasing seen. ALT1 is very catchy and hook ref is verified. ALT1 good to go. Yoninah (talk) 14:34, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
