Talk:Odwalla/Archive 1

Archive 1

POV notice

While the information in this edit is taken from a company information pamphlet, it does accurately reflect the company's mission, philosophy, and manufacturing techniques which seems highly relevant for this page. If a user is accessing this site to get background on a company, this is the type of information that likely is important to them.Sugar Golf 12:42, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Advertisey. I tried to preserve some information when trying to reduce the number of company PR lines used. Some PR lines remain, and I may have lost some information.--ZayZayEM 03:07, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I did a major trim of the article... updating info about the KO's purchase, as well as cutting most of the PR-speak. Feco 07:53, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The speaking in first person plural is a bit of a give-away. Chane 06:37, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

This is clearly not a neutral page and seems like it was taken right from a Press Release.Basmatiman 23:20, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree: the article becomes subtly but increasingly upbeat from the point of the "Co-Cola" merger, onward.(Siryendor (talk) 02:04, 22 October 2008 (UTC))

As one of the editors that vetted this article, I can honestly say that is far from the truth. You should also look at the posts before responding to them, that one is from a year ago and was basically mooted when this article was rewritten. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 04:31, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Not a Virus

E Coli is not a virus.

Coca Cola

It seems very obvious to me that Coca-Cola does its damnedest to support Odwalla, based on the product's target audience. There is no reference to the Coca-cola corp. anywhere on their bottles or on their website. I don't think it is worth mentioning.

Products

I added a products list for juices and bars, but I'm not totally sure the juice list is up to date. I'm going to be working to move this up to GA FA status! Feel free to help! Intothewoods29 (talk) 21:33, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I added all of the products they make, but I'm worried its an indiscriminate list of trivia (per WP:INDISCRIMINATE). I'm thinking it might be better to have a tiny list like:

• Soy Products - These are blah blah blah
• Pomegranate blah blah blah
• Fresh Squeezed Juices etc...

So yeah, please comment! :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Intothewoods29 (talk • contribs) 02:54, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

I moved the page name from Odwalla to Odwalla Inc., since that's the official name of the company (I think). Intothewoods29 (talk) 22:01, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

The usual rule at Wikipedia is to use the common colloquial name for things, thus we have IBM as the article title, not International Business Machines Corporation, etc. I'd recommend you move back to Odwalla. --Macrakis (talk) 23:28, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

$ currency

"The recall cost the company $65 million and took around 48 hours to complete."

The dollar sign currency wikilink leads to a disambiguation page with no mention of the "US currency". Also, why is the dollar sign wikilinked here? --Phenylalanine (talk) 18:30, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Haha oops! I think that's one of my first edits on the page and I accidentally put USC instead of USD (like US Dollar). I removed the wikilink. By the by, what's the accepted standard for currency symbols (when do you put USD$65 million, and when do you write just $65 million)? Thanks for helping! :) Intothewoods29 (talk) 18:47, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

See WP:$, for usage recommendations. Cheers. --Phenylalanine (talk) 19:09, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Question if anyone cares

I removed the following sentence from between the Product header and the Drink subheader:

Odwalla produces various flavors of energy drinks, juices, protein drinks, smoothies, and Superfood drinks, as well as "food bars" (energy bars made with whole grains and fruit).

I could have expanded it, but I thought it'd be best for prose if it was removed. Intothewoods29 (talk) 03:44, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Confusion about italics from FAC

See WP:ITALICS. Periodicals, newspapers, magazines are in italics; corporations, websites, organizations are not.

There are two ways to accomplish italics in cite templates.

Work italicizes, publisher does not. When you need to italicize a periodical, you can either use the work field, or add italics to the entry in the publisher field.

The last time I checked, most of the citations here were correct; I haven't checked recently, but Domiy seems to be saying that periodicals are not italicized, which is incorrect.

Please put up a sample of the problem. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:21, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I will move discussion here to prevent flooding the nomination page. I didn't mean to cause confusion, but I think I may be slightly confused. I see things like 'Inc.com.', 'The New York Times' etc in italics, but are they really necessary? I don't know certainly about the NYT, but I'm pretty sure Inc.com isn't a newspaper or anything similar. Simple domain names should be in simple text, avoid overusing italics as per the guidelines given. Regarding your questions on the 'work' field in the cite template, you should note that such a field is not mandatory and as significant as the others. However, it is very useful to prevent confusion in some cases. This article seems to be ignoring it's services. Here is an example:

Yes, The New York Times is italicized in sources; it's a periodical. I don't recall what Inc.com is; if it's a hard print published periodical, it's in italics; otherwise, not. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:51, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

• ^Ref number 29 -- "Juice maker Odwalla, Inc". BNET, reprinted from Food & Drink Weekly (1998-09-14). Retrieved on 2008-08-18.-- This should be filled out using the 'work' field. So the publisher is Food and Drink Weekly, but the current referenced work is from BNET.

  I believe the periodical is Food and Drink Weekly (work, italics, since it's a magazine) and BNET is the publisher. I don't have the magazine so I could be wrong. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:51, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

• A more specific example, current ref 49 -- "Section of Coke Freezes Hiring". Beverage World, reprinted from The Atlanta Journal-Constitution (2008-07-16). Retrieved on 2008-08-07. -- The publisher is Beverage World, the work is from Atlanta Journal etc.

  But Beverage World is a periodical, so you have to enclose it in italics; in this case, there are two sets of italics. I think. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:51, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Follow this guideline please as the article clearly uses sources which are originally from other sites. This is the prime reason for the 'work' field in cite templates. Please fix this up before proceeding with anything else. You can have a look at how I have done it on this article. I think this is the most correct and appropriate way.

It is far less important to follow cite templates than it is to follow a correct citation style; periodical are italicized, there are different means of accomplishing that. Don't get hung on what the cite templates do or don't do. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:51, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Other than that, the article is looking pretty good. The only thing I would recommend you fix up additionally is the caption in the refrigerator image. The caption is a bit too long, I think it should be reworded and summarized. Foremost, I don't really see the need for that basic first sentence in it. Domiy (talk) 05:46, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

• • Great. I'll work on that ASAP. I'm guessing BNET should not be italicized because it's a website, but I just want to make sure since it's a website that publishes articles. Inc.com is from Inc Magazine, a business magazine; should that be italicized? Thanks again.  Doing... Intothewoods29 (talk) 18:56, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

    Correct. Inc Magazine should be italicized, BNET not. List Inc Magazine in work; if you also want to add Inc.com in publisher, you can do that, too, but it's not necessary. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:51, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Another note, since the citations at Croatia national football team are not yet formatted correctly, and it hasn't passed FAC twice on sourcing concerns, I wouldn't use that article as a sample of how to cite. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:10, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

• Okay, I took care of all that. All the "reprinted from" material is now in the |work= field, and I'm 99% sure that everything is italicized correctly. :) Thanks for you patience; I've been really busy lately, but I want to get this FAC over and done with. Intothewoods29 (talk) 15:50, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

  Is there a typo in Nation's Business? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:51, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

  • • Yes tis fixed. oops! Intothewoods29 (talk) 15:59, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

"Inspector" vs. "Contractor"

The article includes the line "one inspector said that Odwalla's safety procedures were so poorly maintained that they were breeding bacteria in 'black rotten crud'". I followed the reference and the quote is attributed to a "contractor", not an "inspector". Also, the quote is in reference to "Odwalla's citrus-processing equipment", not its "safety procedures". I would suggest changing that line to read something like this:

one contractor warned that Odwalla's citrus processing equipment was poorly maintained and was breeding bacteria in "black rotten crud"

--DeanFerreyra (talk) 19:52, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

I went ahead and made this change. --DeanFerreyra (talk) 14:54, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Illistrum?

The name "Odwalla" was taken from that of a character in the song "Illistrum" written by the Art Ensemble of Chicago jazz group as a metaphor for the company.

This seems to imply that the song was written specifically about the company, but also that the song existed before the company did. Can someone with more information rewrite it to clear up this apparent contradiction? Thanks! Lusanaherandraton (talk) 07:42, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Haha I didn't notice that. Thanks. I fixed it (I think). Intothewoods29 (talk) 15:43, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

I have re-inserted my stuff about Mitchell. With-out it, the article incorrectly says that a musical group composed the song. In fact, Mitchell composed it. I don't know why the editor who took it out wrote that he couldn't find the ref. No, I suppose it is not online if that is what s]he means. But it is a northern California journal about a n. Cal company. the publication can be found in no. Cal. Kdammers (talk) 15:08, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Possible source

An excellent write-up of the 1996 E. coli outbreak is in Chapter 8 of Effective Risk Communication (ISBN 978-0-387-79726-7, doi:10.1007/978-0-387-79727-4_8), which is available on google Book Search. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 18:06, 1 August 2009 (UTC)