Talk:Capri-Sun/Archive 2

Debate about whether it resembles a carton or bottle?

 * Capri Sun has been distributed in the United States since 1981. Capri Sun has also long been debated as to whether the pouch the soft drink comes in more resembles a carton or a bottle and after long debate the plastic pouch more resembles a bottle than a carton.[4]

There's no mention of that in the source link. Seems like BS. It was added here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Capri_Sun&diff=next&oldid=1066441616 Looks like vandalism. I am going to remove it.

2601:646:8600:1C60:8CE1:9B73:39E1:E636 (talk) 09:42, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Article Vandalism
Someone put "sugma squeeze" and "donkey ball blast" as previous flavors 70.166.209.178 (talk) 21:49, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing out the vandalism, I've removed it from the article. Suonii180 (talk) 22:01, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 2 February 2023

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 05:08, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Capri Sun → Capri-Sun – In rewriting this article, theleekycauldron and I—both Americans—could not think of any reason it should be at the American spelling of the brand name. Capri-Sun was founded in Germany, is still based in Germany, and is primarily sold outside the United States; the United States is the only country (or maybe also Canada? unclear) where the brand name is two words rather than hyphenated. We should move to the more international title. -- Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she&#124;they&#124;xe) 01:57, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
 * support as co-conspirator theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 01:58, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Support – I don't think we hyphenate it here in Canada either. But if the non-hypenation is particular to Canada and the US and this is a German product primarily sold outside Canada and the US, it only makes sense to use the hyphenated spelling. Graham (talk) 04:13, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Support always spelled with a hyphen In ictu oculi (talk) 10:52, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Support, per nom. BilledMammal (talk) 15:04, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. I'm pretty sure Capri-Sun is also hyphenated in Canada, but last time I had one was years before I knew what a "trans gender" was. (How times change.) Liliana UwU  (talk / contributions) 03:54, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose. This article was originally written in American English, but this should not be changed without good reason per WP:ENGVAR and existing style decisions should be retained per MOS:RETAIN. Merely that non-Americans use a different spelling is not a good reason to change this. —  Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:27, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * The article is still in American English, and there is no proposal to change that. But this isn't two different names for the same thing. Capri Sun is the American brand and Capri-Sun is the global brand. Variety of English does not dictate what one calls them, any more than it does with the English Football League or Major League Soccer. --  Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she&#124;they&#124;xe) 18:57, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * The English Football League represents a distinct sporting league from Major League Soccer (if you're familiar with the MLS history, it's historically had some substantial differences in rules with penalties, etc. from European Association Football).
 * There is literally no difference between the Capri Sun and Capri-Sun products. They are two names for the same thing, the difference being what country one is in. That's definitionally an WP:ENGVAR issue. —  Red-tailed hawk (nest) 19:57, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Support - Capri-Sun is used worldwide mostly used and as such this should be reflected in this article, Never known it without the hyphen. – Davey 2010 Talk 20:08, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Does the world not include the U.S. and Canada? —  Red-tailed hawk (nest) 20:28, 4 February 2023 (UTC
 * No, The USA/Canada are in a world of their own when it comes to literally everything, spelling/words, company names, cars, trucks, buses, laws. One could argue that the US has ostracised themselves from the rest of the world. Anyway my understanding is that the US/Canada are the only countries to use the un-hypthened name. – Davey 2010 Talk 21:08, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * That's an argument that WP:ENGVAR applies... —  Red-tailed hawk (nest) 22:41, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I hope it's okay but I've chosen to remove our replies as this isn't me, creating a war between nationalities isn't me, Think I've made enough enemies this year without adding all Americans to that list too :), – Davey 2010 Talk 22:58, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * And I have restored them. Please see WP:TPO, which notes that [t]he basic rule... is to not  edit or delete others' posts without their permission and that if anyone has already replied to or quoted your original comment, changing your comment may deprive any replies of their original context, and this should be avoided. —  Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 05:21, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
 * LOL What a sad and pathetic individual you are!, I don't know what you think you gain by adding the irrelevant replies back but you do you!. – Davey 2010 Talk 11:18, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
 * This strikes me as a missed opportunity to take someone else's gesture to deëscalate, even if it was against the letter of guideline. This strikes me as a missed opportunity to come away as the less petty party. Probably veering off-topic here for an RM, but feel free to reply on my talk. You're both constructive contributors and this is a silly argument (or, hint, RTH, just delete the damn thread; bureaucracy's not a good look).  --  Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she&#124;they&#124;xe) 18:08, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Respectfully,, I do not think it appropriate that my on-topic comments in a discussion were deleted by someone else, particularly so when I am responding to an argument that the person who deleted my comment. I hope that you can understand. —  Red-tailed hawk (nest) 18:21, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
 * The only comment of yours that was removed was you restating your vote. It was an attempt to deëscalate. You reëscalated, citing a block of guideline that begins with "the basic rule..." and ends with "... should be avoided" (i.e., acknowledgments of exceptions). Restoring the comments gained nothing (particularly in a discussion where there is no real chance of your position prevailing), while needlessly raising the temperature. Was it appropriate for Davey to delete the comments? Not really. Was it appropriate for you to restore them? Definitely not. Your action in no way made Wikipedia better. --  Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she&#124;they&#124;xe) 18:28, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Support Per MOS:COMMONALITY. Scorpions13256 (talk) 00:13, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Apparent synthesis
Tamzin, theleekycauldron, I think there is some Synthesis in the article around the DYK hook. The references are Nguyen et al. 2019 and Jacobs 2019, the relevant one seems to be Nguyen et al. 2019. The text may be supported by other references that I have not checked.


 * in the lead
 * "In 1991, Shasta sold Capri Sun Inc. to Philip Morris Cos. (now Altria), a tobacco conglomerate." the body says Capri Sun Inc. was sold to Kraft, owned by Philip Morris Cos., the lead should too.
 * "Philip Morris executives applied their experience in selling tobacco to children" this should be reworded as I don't think "selling tobacco to children" is sourced for Philip Morris.
 * in the body
 * "Kraft's parent company, Philip Morris Cos. (now Altria), was proficient in marketing to young people, but could not sell its cigarette products to children in the United States." this combines "material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any source". Nguyen says "Tobacco executives transferred their knowledge of marketing to young people", so I think "proficient in marketing to young people" is synthesis, as is combining the first and second parts of the sentence.
 * "Through Kraft's acquisition of Capri Sun, however, Philip Morris could target a product to children between the ages of 6 and 14, in ways that represented a significant shift in the product's marketing strategy." this is linked to the sentence about selling cigarettes to children by the word "however", resulting in synthesis. Nguyen does not say anything about how the marketing strategy under the previous management, so I think the words "significant shift" are also synthesis.

TSventon (talk) 13:45, 3 February 2023 (UTC)


 * egads, a goof! It appears we're citing the wrong Jacobs 2019; this is the correct reference, I'll swap it in right now. The sentence "Internal correspondence showed how tobacco executives, barred from targeting children for cigarette sales, focused their marketing prowess on young people to sell sugary beverages in ways that had not been done before." should clear up the synth issues.theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 15:11, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Preserving the other (useful) citation:
 * theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 15:13, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
 * We would need a source on how exactly Big Tobacco got their marketing prowess for young people (hint: it was by selling tobacco to kids in other countries, also by hooking in protected kids early without even selling the products). theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 15:20, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing this out. The issue here, I think, is that Nguyen assumes a fair amount of familiarity with the topic area of tobacco advertising, and never bothers to spell out the obvious of why tobacco companies knew how to market to kids. Fortunately, UPI does spell it out. Does the current wording work for you? I've also removed the claim that PMC was motivated by laws against marketing tobacco to children, as I didn't see that in the source; the strongest laws against that only went into effect after PMC gave up Kraft. if I'm missing something, feel free to restore with quote.  --  Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she&#124;they&#124;xe) 19:32, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you Tamzin, I will have another look tomorrow. TSventon (talk) 20:36, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you Tamzin, I will have another look tomorrow. TSventon (talk) 20:36, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Tamzin, I have collapsed my initial examples and updated them with the correct Jacobs 2019 reference below. I now need to check your new sources and wording since 19.00 on 3 February.
 * in the lead
 * "In 1991, Shasta sold Capri Sun Inc. to Philip Morris Cos. (now Altria), a tobacco conglomerate." the body says Capri Sun Inc. was sold to Kraft, owned by Philip Morris Cos., the lead should too.
 * "Philip Morris executives applied their experience in selling tobacco to children, adding the pouches to Lunchables and advertising them through a "California cool" aesthetic. " this should be reworded as I don't think "selling tobacco to children" is sourced for Philip Morris. The first half comes from Jacobs and the second from Nguyen, so it looks like synthesis, i.e. combining "material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any source".
 * in the body
 * "Kraft's parent company, Philip Morris Cos. (now Altria), was proficient in marketing to young people, but could not sell its cigarette products to children in the United States." Nguyen says "Tobacco executives transferred their knowledge of marketing to young people" and Jacobs says " tobacco executives, barred from targeting children for cigarette sales, focused their marketing prowess on young people to sell sugary beverages", so I think "proficient in marketing to young people" is synthesis.
 * "Through Kraft's acquisition of Capri Sun, however, Philip Morris could target a product to children between the ages of 6 and 14, in ways that represented a significant shift in the product's marketing strategy." this is based on Nguyen and linked to the sentence about selling cigarettes to children based on Jacobs by the word "however", resulting in synthesis. Nguyen does not say anything about the marketing strategy under the previous management, so I think the words "significant shift" are also synthesis.

TSventon (talk) 10:28, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Some of the above seems to be about the version prior to Special:Diff/1137349678. Does that address your concerns about "selling tobacco to children" and "marketing to young people"? As to the last bullet point, would seem to verify both the "however" and the "significant shift".  --  Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she&#124;they&#124;xe) 19:07, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * , thank you for the updated text and references, which I have now checked. I have made a couple of minor changes and removed "however" because there was a contrast with the final clause of the previous sentence in an earlier version that is not there now. My remaining minor concern is that the words "significant shift" are synthesis as Nguyen, Jacobs and Dyson do not say anything about the marketing strategy under the previous management. "in ways that had not been done before" is about "sugary beverages" in general, rather than Capri Sun in particular. TSventon (talk) 19:23, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * @TSventon: I disagree; Jacobs 2019 is a direct secondary analysis of Nguyen, there's no reason to think that the author wasn't including Capri Sun in their quote. They're not talking about sugary drinks in general, they're talking about sugary drinks mentioned in The BMJ, of which Capri Sun is absolutely a relevant entry. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 21:05, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Also, the deletion of "however" wasn't necessary – both Nguyen and Jacobs clearly see Philip Morris's inability to market cigarettes to children as one of the causes of their acquisition of Capri Sun through Kraft. Requiring every author to say "The reason for Y is X" would lead to rather stunted writing, the authors clearly don't think they're unrelated facts. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 21:09, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
 * theleekycauldron, I will leave this as I am busy in real life. Apologies for not replying sooner. TSventon (talk) 13:41, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:09, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Capri-Sun und Capri-Sonne.jpg

Truth Tobacco Industry Documents
Tamzin, theleekycauldron, the first paragraph of the Kraft section depends heavily on Nguyen et al's paper, which uses the Truth Tobacco Industry Documents, see Nguyen's footnotes and Jacobs' 2019 article. Would it be possible to mention the BMJ and the TTID in the sentence beginning "Kraft's parent company, Philip Morris Cos."? I haven't added TTID myself as the sentence is already quite long and supports the DYK hook. TSventon (talk) 12:06, 5 February 2023 (UTC)


 * @TSventon: It's possible, sure, but why? Adding in-line attribution might only serve to make the reader feel that we weren't willing to say it in wikivoice (which we totally should be). If readers want references, they can always look for them, but the information's not exactly in doubt. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 21:04, 5 February 2023 (UTC)


 * theleekycauldron, I agree with the use of wikivoice, but I think that a mention of the Truth Tobacco Industry Documents would be helpful to readers because a whole paragraph of the article is largely based on them. For example, when I read the BMJ paper I saw that "internal tobacco industry documents" had been used and saw references to the University of California. I then found the Wikipedia article on the Truth Tobacco Industry Documents, which I had not heard of previously. TSventon (talk) 13:44, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Logos
I have no objection to replacing the logos to have the non-North American logo atop the North American one, but the international and American logos that were used in this version were out-of-date. Feel free to upload a picture with the two swapped or separate with transparent bg (I'm limited to a newer version of MS paint, so my image editing is going to be subpar). —  Red-tailed hawk (nest) 05:48, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
 * There's no need to do an MS Paint mashup here. We can just do the two current logos top-to-bottom. Would you mind uploading them, since you seem to already have a handle on this? --  Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she&#124;they&#124;xe) 06:07, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅ The greater curvature on the EMEA logo makes me weakly prefer to put the North American one on top for aesthetic reasons, but I'd like a second opinion before doing so. —  Red-tailed hawk (nest) 06:53, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Reliable retailers in Canada tend to list it as "Capri Sun", such as Walmart, Amazon, and SnackCo (each of which have pictures of the logos on the boxes). I will note that the The Globe and Mail uses "Capri Sun" rather than the hyphenated version, as does National Post, and the Toronto Star, CTV, etc. so its use without a dash in Canada is fairly well-attributed. —  Red-tailed hawk (nest) 07:37, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Sure, I just removed it as unverified in body. I'm off to bed, but should have time tomorrow to add something to body and then adjust the 'box accordingly, or of course you're welcome to. --  Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she&#124;they&#124;xe) 07:40, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
 * So after looking into all of this quite a bit, with both the sources listed above and a number of others, my findings are:
 * No secondary source verifies that Capri Sun is sold in Canada at all (although a few imply it in passing)
 * While primary sources do show Capri Sun being available for purchase in Canada, that's not enough to state definitively that the U.S. logo is also the Canada logo, which would be WP:OR
 * As best I can tell, Mexico, which is also in North America, uses (or used, unclear) the international logo
 * In other words, there's nothing in the body of the article that would justify clearly labeling either of these logos by any particular geographic region, and nothing in any source I can find, after an exhaustive search, that would help with that. So instead I have switched the labels to simply "primary logo" and "logo used by Kraft", as neither of those facts are in dispute. And I've returned to the primary logo to the top, because that's where primary things go; I made it a proper paragraph break between the two, to balance aesthetically. --  Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she&#124;they&#124;xe) 05:19, 11 February 2023 (UTC)