Talk:Warheads (candy)

What? This article has nothing to do with advertising. I will repost unless there are any objections.

I say keep the article, though I'm likely prejudiced since these candies played a somewhat significant role in my childhood. The article reads like a stub, not an advertisement... and the candy has been around for at least 15-20 years, which is pretty significant for a particular variety of candy. Antepenultimate 02:02, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Also, looking around Wikipedia, many other short articles, similar to this one, exist for other candies. Let's not jump the gun here. Antepenultimate 02:23, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Notability

I would very passionately contest the assertion that Warheads aren't notable. Many people (myself included) have very fond memories of Warheads from childhood, and thousands (if not millions) of children eat Warheads every day. Judging from the inclusion of other, far more recently-created and less notable candies (Maltesers, Chomp'n Bubble Gum Crayons, and as there are notability guidelines for candy, I say we keep this article. -- Thesocialistesq/M.Lesocialiste 02:42, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I think the article needs some reliable, independent sources, but I also think the candy (which I've personally only had a few times in my life) have sufficient notability. -- Kicking222 02:43, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Nope: first of, Maltesers are much better known internationally, and your other example (Chomp's) has been created by the same person and has been deleted already three times. I don't see any reason why the info on these candies can not be included in the main article about the company. And we do have guidelines: WP:CORP deals with companies and their products, and these are just products. Warheads are probably the best known of Impact's products, but unless they have true notability per WP:V and WP:CORP, they should go. I'll let this one be for now to allow discussion, but some of the others I'll just redirect as containing no encyclopedic value as a separate article at all... 81.82.3.70 08:07, 29 November 2006 (UTC) I wasn't logged in apparently... Fram 08:09, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Checking this page's log reveals that this article was, in fact, deleted about a week ago. It appears (but I don't know for certain, as I'm somewhat new at this) that this was a snap judgement for a speedy deletion per an admin's whim. IF (and I do say IF) this page must be deleted, I would like to see it done through the WP:AFD process. Notability is in the eye of the beholder, no matter how many official policies exist. Maybe it's just misplaced sentimentality, but I for one am glad that Wikipedia has an article about this particular subject. -- Antepenultimate 18:46, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I've eaten these things for years in Australia. I didn't even know that 'Impact' made them; the product is certainly more notable than the manufacturer. Thesocialistesq mentions there are guidelines for candy. Anyone got a link? Mister Pe 01:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, it looks as though someone has taken me up on the offer for the WP:AFD. Whatever will be, will be. Since it would probably be innapropriate to rant over at that discussion page, let me just say one thing. Deletionists for an article such as this will point to the fact that it could be merged with the Impact Confections article. However, doing so would discourage others from expanding upon the specifics regarding Warheads, which, until recently, weren't even affiliated with Impact. Mister Pe is right: This particular brand is, in fact, much more notable (or, at the very least, recognized, respected, and fondly remembered) than its parent company. I'd make a friendly wager that almost NOBODY would ever search for Impact Confections; but maybe a few might be curious about that particular sour candy they enjoyed so much 20 years ago. Now, just try and do a Google search: Unless you were looking to buy these in bulk for your church's fundraiser, you'de be pretty dissappointed. Note however that the old (and since deleted) Wikipedia page comes up on the first page of results. THIS is the purpose of Wikipedia: Here, someone might be able to gather details pertaining to a product such as this without wading through some corporate site and numerous worthless webpages. By leaving this stub, more information could be added by future users. By deleting it, you pretty much ensure that it is little more than a passing mention on some page about a candy company nobody has ever heard of (but at least they meet those all-important "guidelines"!). -- Antepenultimate 02:56, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Agreed with Mister Pe and Antepenultimate - I was just doing a search for the various candies that I enjoyed as a child, and I happened to look up Warheads. I know nothing about Impact Candy - heck, for all I knew, I thought Warheads were made by Just Born, the same folks that make Lemonheads and Peeps. I recall that even years ago, when I was in gradeschool, when I would bring a bag of bulk-bought Warheads into school they would be popular with just about everyone. That should stand testament to the candy's market penetration. Furthermore, insofar as there is a page for virtually every Hershey's product ever made, even ones I'd never heard of, why give short shrift to the little guy? You don't see me going and requesting the deletion of arcane Hershey's product pages just because of the fact that I've never heard of them. Ye gods, people. Anonymous Coward

Please note that I have added some more specific information to the article, and have cited an Independent Source. Hopefully more to come. Antepenultimate 16:12, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

And there you have it, a second properly-cited independent source. I beleive that even under the strictest reading of WP:CORP's Products and Services section, this article and subject now qualifies as Notable. -- Antepenultimate 21:17, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Great! I'll see what I can dig up about Warheads in Australia for another section and a couple more references. Mister Pe 23:33, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Right, I've added a little more information and some web references, as well as the quote about eating too many, taken from the rear of the packaging. I've also added a photo that I just took and uploaded of the Warheads Juniors that I've been eating. My tongue hurts - a lot! :) (I haven't done the image thing before. I hope I did it all correctly!) Mister Pe 07:53, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Yay

I think this article deserves to be promoted from Stub status. -Slash- 01:44, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Bold text[[

notable?

Shouldn't ALL candy be notable? It's a brand name food product that's sold nationwide, if this candy is from Taiwan what about it's significant in that country? --24.94.251.19 (talk) 06:28, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Caps or Not

After someone changed the name to WARHEADS® all in caps as this is the registered trademark. I will remove the ® as I don't think its apropriate on wikipedia, was wanting other peoples views on whether it should be in all caps as this is how it is displayed on the product?? Bacchus87 (talk) 19:03, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I think the name Warheads should be changed back to WARHEADS, as this is indeed the registered trademark of the brand, and seeing how it has international distribution (US, Canada, Middle East, Europe, Australia, Singapore) it is relevant that the integrity of the trademark be respected in this forum. As an example, the wiki article on the iPod references that product name repeatedly in the proper context (not ipod or Ipod), while this article does not treat the WARHEADS brand with the same status. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.109.57.82 (talk) 18:54, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Name

Didn't they use to be called ATOMIC WARHEADS? --24.94.251.19 (talk) 06:31, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Warheads (candy).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:34, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• En-Warheads (candy).ogg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:11, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Which acid?

In the main body, the sour flavor is mainly attributed citric acid. In the chemistry section, the claim is that malic acid is the primary driver. Seems a bit contradictory, perhaps it should be clarified. Photovolts (talk) 02:05, 17 March 2022 (UTC)