Talk:Frappuccino

Not just a Starbucks product
Other coffee shops such as Seattle's best do make Fraps! Be careful when it comes to this!!!! This is very important because are we talking about the Starbucks coffee or are we talking about Fraps in general? It makes a HUGE difference. Alliereborn (talk) 04:56, 20 July 2011 (UTC)Alliereborn
 * Frappuccino is a specific trademarked name originally owned by the Coffee Connection that comes from combining the New England term for a thick milkshake with cappuccino. Though this is primarily an article about the trademarked drink from Starbucks, there should be a reference to other drinks offered by competitors in response to Frappuccino and often colloquially referred to as frappuccinos (sometimes even listed that way on the menu). For other uses of Frappe see its disambiguation page.--Bruce Hall (talk) 02:44, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Vivanno
Vivannos are not frappucinos, and partners have been informed in all internal promotional materials to separate the two. While they are both blended beverages the vivannos and the frappucinos are different recipe, preparation, nutritional and content wise.

Fragment
Can somebody finish the last sentence, please? RickK 06:34, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)

Original recipe
Actually, Starbucks states that the drink now served in stores originated in 1995 and that they simply use the name from Coffee Connection (rather than invent a new one), which would also tell us the super weird and strange crazy or just the difference in tasty deliciousness that customers experience. 07:00, 31 October 2005

Proposed Move
© doesn't belong in the article name. It's not even correct, as Frappuccino is a Trade Mark (™) not a copyrighted work. --Dystopos 00:54, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I moved the article back to Frappuccino by your reasoning. Kusma (討論) 01:22, 19 December 2005 (UTC)


 * To be precise, it's a Registered Trade Mark (&reg;). --Purplezart 07:15, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I have suggested that this page be merged with the Starbucks page, since "Frappucino" is a trademarked name for a Starbucks beverage, and is unlikely to be encountered outside of that context. There is also a lot of overlap in the information in both articles. Please contribute to the discussion on the Talk:Starbucks page. --Purplezart 20:33, 7 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I disagree with the proposed move. The two pages are quite long enough already (although they both need work).  This content would be very out of place on the starbucks page, given that the starbucks page does not even discuss the contents (beyond sizes) of their regular espresso drinks.  -The Gomm 03:53, 12 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Most of the beverages available at Starbucks are not unique or trade-marked; Frappucinos are. Furthermore, I believe that most of the information on this Frappucino article is far too in-depth, and needs to be edited down anyway. --Purplezart 06:33, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I'll second this. The article reads like a menu... GChriss &lt;always listening&gt;  &lt;c&gt; 06:21, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

frappuccino recipe
I posted an external link to a frappuccino recipe. It's been removed from both locations I posted it, marked as spam. Is there a way I could post it and it not be considered spam? I get so many searches for this recipe (coming to my site), I thought it would be beneficial to post it. Would rewriting it to be more article-style be better? It's not my intention to spam. - Madaise 02:35, 5 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I was the person who removed this link. The problem with it is that the article is specifically about the Starbucks trademarked product. If the link somehow contributed to knowledge about that subject, then I think it would be ok. Maybe if it were the exact recipe used by Starbucks, that would be ok too. But that's not what it is. It's not feasible to have every possible related topic linked here. Ultimately that's what Google is for. ScottW 14:27, 19 May 2006 (UTC)


 * If you think that recipes for 'frappuccino-like' drinks do not belong on this page, where would you suggest they go? I would argue that it is a unique beverage and any recipes which produce a similar beverage could be referenced on this page. --Ozziegt (talk) 00:45, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

The actual beverage is currently manufactured by Pepsi. There's no way that what was linked to was "the recipe". It was a copycat recipe, which is fine, but doesn't really have a place in an encyclopedia article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.6.88.228 (talk) 21:40, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Tazo Tea Frappuccinos
They still sell these drinks in the UK. Perhaps mention of this can be made. Don't know what the situation is like in the rest of the world but Starbucks here in Manchester still do Tropical Citrus Frappuccinos which I believe contain the Tazo Tea. Last summer they did a variation using fresh Mango too.


 * Maybe if you can get more info about these? Are they still similar to the old receipe or is it a modified version similar to some other companies make? (ie: Panera Bread, etc). Also what flavors are they currently available in right now? When gonig to the [Starbucks UK] site, and found the nutrition guide, all it mentioned was:
 * FRAPPUCCINO® BLENDED TEA
 * RASPBERRY TEA
 * TROPICAL CITRUS TEA
 * Nothing clear about if these are still using Tazo nor if they are just tea blended with ice (like a "Slushie" type of drink, anyone else have anymore info?) ZyphBear 17:32, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

In Case it wasn't noticed, the "Blended Juice" drinks were added recently. No Specifics on if they are different from the UK Versions. Anyone have any info?ZyphBear 10:50, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Excuse me, "Blended Juice", I believe your refering to "Juice Blends". Starbucks has to complicate drink orders even further. Blended coffee, blended crème, juice blends? Why, Starbucks? Why?--  jmatt1122   C V U (Talk)  17:14, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Complete Revision
This article was completely revised and had very valid, useful information removed and something reworded that now make no sense. I am suggesting a Revision back and some of these changes talked about before such a total rework with a "Minor" label tagged to it as well. I'm going to revert this back and then we can comment on what needs changed.ZyphBear 04:12, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
 * OK, I took the time to reword some oddly phrased areas, corrected capitalization, and grammar, then removed the “recommendation” about sugars, while leaving the nutrition information so people can decide how to interpret the information provided on their own. The previous edit was marked as being “minor” when in no way would that describe the edit. The Word count went from 3,178 to 2,764 due to full deletions of information. On top of that, some of the new paragraphs made no sense in relation to the content of the article. In some instances, where words were changed, the entire meaning of the paragraph was opposite of the intended information. (example: in the “Special versions”, the sentence was changed from The following are some of the popular drinks that have been made available to The following are some of the popular drinks that are available, this implies that these versions are still available, which in fact the point of the section is to dictate items that are NOT available any longer.)
 * Plus the reference of '"It is currently available in three sizes: Tall (12 ounce), Grandé (16 ounce), and Ventí (24 ounce).”  They are typed like this due to being trademarked terms by Starbucks, the capitalization and punctuation is required since they are part of the trademark. Please do not change these. These are also typed the same way in the Starbucks article. (you wouldn’t change ‘’’iPod’’’ to ‘’’ipod’’’, same difference. Thank you. ZyphBear 14:01, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

NPOV
Since this article has been revised, it has lost its former NPOV. Parts of it read as though written by someone disgusted by the company and parts by someone enamored of the company. Addtionally, there are currently anachronistic strings, such as CBB mentioned with the Tazo Berry and Tazo Citrus. @ Kaibab  TALK  03:56, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I would ask to clarify where the NPOV you are referencing from when the article was expanded.ZyphBear 10:47, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
 * The history section seems particularly like a POV rant. Unless reliable sources can be added, I think this entire section should go. --MichaelZimmer (talk) 17:28, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I removed some of the more subjective POV, (i.e. the reference to quote "originality" unquote in regards to Starbucks) because they served no purpose in the article and only contributed to overall bias. The article simply needs to talk about the frappuccino, not make go out of its way to convey the opinion that the author shares about Starbucks. No one cares about that and it only serves to take away from the reliability and integity of the article as a whole. Lauren 18:42, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Large Bottled Frappuccinos
I saw Large Bottled Starbucks Frappuccinos for sale at a 24-hour gas/fastfood/truckstop near Youngstown, Ohio on Tuesday 25JUL2006. Off of I-80 (maybe Exit 223).

The bottle was about 15 or 16 oz., as best as I can recall (regretably, I did not buy it).

I presume that the large bottle is being test marketed in Ohio or that part of Ohio.

Anybody with any info on this Large-sized Bottled Frappuccino, and if and when it will be marketed nationwide - please post.

Thanx.

72.82.164.29 04:38, 6 August 2006 (UTC)


 * This is quite some time after this was originally discussed, but the large bottles have been available for at least some years now because I used to buy them when I would go on break at a place I worked at only during the summer of 2004. However, that was also in Ohio, though on the other side of the state (Bellefontaine). I also believe I have purchased them in Southern California, while at college, but that one I can't verify at the moment.AffirmationChick 20:29, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Milkshake?
The second sentence of the first paragraph states:

"It is sold as a coffee beverage but is in actuality a milkshake."

However, the milkshake article indicates that there is no consensus definition on what exactly constitutes a milkshake. The basic recipe varies in the US, UK, and New England. A Frappuccino might be similar to a milkshake in the UK, but they're nothing like milkshakes in most of the US. The term should be dropped from the definition.

Justin


 * I agree. Putting milk into a blended ice drink does not make it a milkshake.  -The Gomm 21:40, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Java Chips
"Note**** Java Chips are in fact the exact same thing as Mocha Chips, the name was changed for marketing reasons, and therefore all of the drinks (except the POWER ones) can still be made at a Starbucks upon request"

Why does that note exist? It should be incorporated into the actual java chip section of the "Discontinued Section". Maybe something like "While some argue that Mocha Chips and Java Chips differ in texture and taste, they are in fact the same. The name was changed for marketing reasons."

But as far as I know, that's unsourced anyway. Just like much of that section, now that I look at it. It's a little bit NPOV, and a lot uncited. "but many people could tell the difference and no longer got that type of blended coffee." According to who? Kendall 05:44, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Extremely POV
This article is in need of some serious revisions/deletions. It's also chock full of original research (the parts about what the syrups taste like). It's really long for a description of one company's coffee drink product.

I just posted a comment like this yesterday. STOP DELETING DISCUSSION COMMENTS. Dukie010 01:58, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I removed your comment just now from the article itself: no harm, no foul. Thanks, GChriss &lt;always listening&gt;  &lt;c&gt; 17:21, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

No article accompanying the title "decaf"?
There is no article after the title "decaf". So I guess I'll try to look up something about decaf frappuccinos. If I can't find anything, it would be nice if someone else could. Thanks,CreamOfTheCrop 20:36, 3 March 2007 (UTC)CreamOfTheCrop

Oh yeah, and can someone please tell me: is there a reason it would have no article? Because I know that sometimes it’s okay for titles not to have articles, so is it really necessary for there to be an article below "decaf" or is the word self-explanatory enough?

Why is there a subject for "varieties" and "avaliable versions"?
They contain some of the same topics. Can someone combine the level-two headlines and double-topics into one? CreamOfTheCrop 21:03, 3 March 2007 (UTC)CreamOfTheCrop

Trivia
"In the movie Zoolander, several male supermodels order Orange Mocha Frappuccinos as a form of escapism. This was a limited time offering that was discontinued after summer, 2000. A similar drink could be ordered at any Starbucks by ordering a 'Valencia Mocha Frappuccino' although that flavor of syrup has been discontinued."

The words "could be" doesn't make sense, because if I stated something like "you could go to the park if you wanted to" this means "You can if you want". Since you can't order that flavor any longer, it should read something like: "Valencia Mocha Frappucino" is a similar drink that was discontinued, which was available at any Starbucks. Keihiro 15:03, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

I work at Starbucks. Do you know how easy it is to walk into one and get real facts about their drinks? Orange Mochas were brought back this summer. There are also Orange Creme, Raspberry Creme, Raspberry Mocha, Pomegranate Juice Blend, and just Pomegranate for Fraps. This page needs some SERIOUS work done on it and some of it looks like it comes from other sites (copyright issue).

"Caffeine-Free"
In the section on Crème frappucinos, a Crème Frappucino is described as "caffeine-free". Starbucks has never described its crème frappuccunos as caffeine-free (to my knowledge) and there is thus no reason to believe they are. I am thus removing this, unless someone can cite it.

It is very unlikely that all crème frappucinos are caffeine-free: cocoa contains caffeine, and as some of the frappuccinos involve chocolate, we cannot describe crème frappuccinos as caffeine free.

--Niall9 10:24, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

They are caffeine free. They're non-fat milk and powdered creme. I don't see how you think they have caffeine when they are entirely milk. (unsigned comment)

According to Starbucks itself, some Creme frappuccinos have caffeine (e.g. Double Chocolate Chip Frappuccino® Blended Crème has 25g) and others don't (e.g. Dulce de Leche Frappuccino® Blended Crème has 0g. Coffee Frappuccinos, of course, have much more (e.g. Coffee Frappuccino® Blended Coffee has 110g). No surprises here. --Macrakis 18:30, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

History/Etymology
"The name Frappuccino was coined by The Coffee Connection. In this etymology, the term frappuccino is a blend of frappé, the Greek term for a coffee-based milkshake, and cappuccino, the coffee drink with a milky topping (see below for alternate etymologies)"

The article does not include the alternate etymologies mentioned at the end of this paragraph. It also offers no citation for this etymology.

One alternate etymology that I would offer is that instead of frappé, the Greek coffee-based drink, the first root is frappe, as in the regional New England term for what most of the US calls a milkshake. Given the term's point of origin was the Boston coffee shop chain The Coffee Connection and that its owner was not Greek, I think this is more plausible.

Tschlatter (talk) 13:59, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Presumably both the Greek term and the Boston term are the French word frappe with an acute accent (beaten), even though in the Boston area "frappe" is only one syllable. Since The Coffee Connection is Bostonian it seems to me likely that the Greek term has nothing to do with it. Andrew Frank, who, I read on the internet, came up with this term (or drink?) when at the Coffee Connection, is not Greek--he's from Cincinnati. Ccerf (talk) 01:56, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

One must also remember the strong French-Canadian influence in New England, especially in northern Vermont and New Hampshire, up against the Quebec border. Further a significant percentage of New Englanders report on census forms that they have French heritage.

There is also a significant Greek influence, especially in Massachusetts, but Greek immigrants largely came after the term was in use.

Interesting to note that in Philippine coffee shops that are competitors (copycats?) of Starbucks, "frappe" means their version of "frappucino".

What about Dunkin' Donuts's "Dunkaccino"? Should that be mentioned? --Bruce Hall (talk) 07:51, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to interject, but why is everyone pushing "frappe"? I've always heard it was a shoved together version of "frozen cappuccino". 70.57.13.141 (talk) 17:59, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The name clearly came out of Boston and in New England "frappe" is a old word for a thick milk shake. There are interviews to back up the etymology that it is a merging of "frappe" with "cappuccino", which even the pronunciation supports -- "frap-u-cino".  --Bruce Hall (talk) 05:18, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Frappé is the word used by italians for "milkshake" too, so I think the ethimology is that. 93.40.123.212 (talk) 11:25, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Which would again argue for the Boston connection I think, especially given the connection between Italian and French, and then French-Canadians and New England. Etymonline connects "frappe" to Old French.  Did it enter italian from the French or did it enter Italian and Old French through a common source? Regardless, given the Coffee Connection connection and the popularity of "frappe" in New England (e.g. the Friendly Frappe at Friendley's restaurants), I don't think the Greek etymology holds much weight for an American invention.  The drink is clearly a combination of a milkshake and a coffee drink and in New England "frappe" is, or was, far more common then "milkshake" and so Frappucino. --Bruce Hall (talk) 08:42, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Trivial
The following section, which was labelled ==In Popular Culture== in the article, seems trivial to me. Does any of this seem important enough to keep? RJFJR (talk) 17:34, 18 April 2008 (UTC) It does seem trivial, but is a normal part of many articles. Longer versions even group references by media type. I'm putting it back, and tidying. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Choz Cunningham (talk • contribs) 12:51, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Chester Bennington of Linkin Park demanded to know where his "fucking Frappuccino" was in the beginning of the song Dirt Off Your Shoulder/Lying From You, from their collaboration album with Jay-Z entitled "Collision Course".
 * In the movie Zoolander, several male supermodels order Orange Mocha Frappuccinos as a form of escapism. This was a limited time offering that was originally discontinued after the summer of 2000 but returned in the summer of 2007. The Frappuccinos served in the movie have an orange color indicative of an Orange Crème Frappuccino Blended Crème, as opposed to the brown color of an orange mocha Frappuccino.
 * Tré Cool can be seen running around yelling "Orange Mocha Frappuccino" on the Green Day DVD Bullet in a Bible.
 * Weird Al Yankovic, in the song "I'll Sue Ya", mentioned he sued Starbucks because he spilled a Frappuccino in his lap and it was cold.
 * Frappuccino is cited by singer Nick Cave in the song "Abattoir Blues," from the double album Abattoir Blues/The Lyre of Orpheus: "I woke up this morning/with a Frappuccino in my hands".
 * Frappuccino is cited by the NYC-based band The Dictators in their song "Avenue A" from the album D.F.F.D.: "Taking the edge off a beautiful day/with a Frappuccino/and a crème bruleé"
 * Rhyme Scheme, a trip hop group from Miamisburg, wrote a song devoted to drinking "frappies" entitled "Frapp Rapp (Get Busy Yo)".

Nutritional information
It seems like somewhere there should be nutritional information about this delicious drink. I think most people know it's a very very high calorie drink and some readers may be interested in knowing more precise numbers. But I suspect Starbucks' employees will probably remove it anyways and/or find some reason this "harmful" (to Starbucks) information should not be made public. Can someone try to include it in the article? 220.76.15.122 (talk) 16:17, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I like that idea. One could add in a statistics section or a "label" section which could include nutrition information. I could see that such info would be of a general interest nature, especially if the "battle against the bulge" picks up more steam. However, given the wide number of varieties, I am not sure how to list the info. --Bruce Hall (talk) 08:46, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Frappucino "competitors"
Much like Starbucks competitors in the US, like Dunkin' Donuts, Philippine coffee shops have begun offering there own versions of Frappuccinos and calling them "frappes", often with a French-like two-syllable pronunciation. I find this interesting and relevant. It's part of the history and impact of Frappuccinos. They have helped to create and name an entire new category of drink. An anonymous editor disagreed and struck out the reference saying '"Frappuccino-style" is not frappuccino, and is thusly irrelevent.' I don't understand this. Why remove a reference to the competitors' response in the Philippines but not to Dunkin' Donuts? Can someone explain? Or should I just put the reference back in? --Bruce Hall (talk) 16:12, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Since no one has come to the defense of the removal, I will put back in the reference to non-American competitors next to the American competitors to the Frappucino. --Bruce Hall (talk) 05:20, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Frappuccino — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.161.74.18 (talk) 02:18, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Mocha Lite Composition
Another reason bottled Mocha Lite is lower in calories than regular Mocha is that some of the sugar is replaced with the artificial sweetener sucralose, source: (ingredient list on bottle). Michfr (talk) 16:10, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 15:32, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Recent addition to lead
The following text was recently added to the lead:
 * It is based on a fusion of various New England regional beverages, including the coffee frap (similar to iced coffee) and the frappe (similar to a milkshake), with the Italian cappuccino.

There are several problems with this: So I don't see what to save from that statement. --Macrakis (talk) 20:28, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
 * The lead should normally summarize the main text. This information not only does not summarize the main text, it contradicts it. The main text makes clear that the name of this beverage comes from "frappe" (ice cream milkshake) + "cappuccino"; it does not say that the beverage does.
 * A frappuccino does not contain ice cream or steamed milk, the characteristic components of a frappe and a cappuccino. So I don't see how it could be a "fusion" of the two.
 * The notion that the term "coffee frap" precedes the Frappuccino seems to rest on an unsourced parenthetical aside in the "USA Phrasebook" guidebook, which says "In New England, get a coffee fribble or coffee frap (this is where Starbucks gets 'frappuccino')". This contradicts the good information already in the article, that the frappuccino was invented and named by the Coffee Connection. Also, a Lonely Planet USA phrasebook seems like an awfully poor source.
 * Iced coffee beverages, with or without cream, under the name café frappé, have a long history outside New England. Though (as a New Englander myself) I'm familar with the popularity of iced coffee in New England, that doesn't mean it was invented here. I have just added some sources in the café frappé article on this.
 * The reference you just added (Zeppelin) directly contradicts the New England origin story. (Though it is not a great source.)

PS A "Fribble" is simply Friendly's trademark for their version of a frappe, which tends to show that the USA Phrasebook is not so solid.... --Macrakis (talk) 20:31, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
 * The main text is a stub related to the Starbucks product, so there is little to summarize. You're welcome to move information from the lede to the body of the article. Nothing in the lede contradicts the article's content. There is no reason to interpret certain facts as being mutually exclusive. From the Today Show source (maybe you missed the second half of the article...?): "But a drink like that needs an equally charming name. The name Frappuccino® came from Boston. In 1992, the Coffee Connection launched a frozen drink meant as a play on New England's milkshake, the frappe. Sales grew, in part due to the Frappuccino, and cafe owner George Howell opened 23 more locations. When he sold the company to Starbucks in 1994, the Frappuccino® name found its match in Rogers' creation."From Starbucks itself:"Meanwhile Starbucks acquired The Coffee Connection in Boston, along with one of their products called “frappuccino,” a cold, slushy drink made using a soft-serve machine. Starbucks applied the name to its new blended beverage."Another source:"Frank developed a unique blend of coffee, sugar, milk, and ice, and used a frozen yogurt machine to create a smooth, creamy consistency. And Frank came up with the name as well: The Frappuccino, a play on the New England milkshake, the frappe."Cursory Googling reveals a panoply of other sources stating similar things. In cuisine, a "fusion" refers to a mixture of influences; for example, using parts of two preexisting recipes in order to create a new, different recipe is an example of a fusion of the original two. It does not necessarily imply a literal mixing together of all of the ingredients, and in fact rarely ever does. So, to say that a creamy, iced, coffee-based beverage like a frappuccino is a fusion of other popular beverages, like iced coffee (coffee + milk + sugar + ice), frappes (iced cream + milk), and others, is not at all inaccurate, especially when sources suggest as much.
 * Please feel free to continue to add more sources and details to the article. This is hardly a very important subject, so I think it would be good to continue to encourage everybody to contribute what they can as they can, and not delete or undo good-faith edits. --TimothyDexter (talk) 21:55, 7 August 2016 (UTC)


 * I have added plenty of sourced information to this article, to iced coffee, and to frappé coffee. I don't see any contradiction in the quotes you include above. They all agree that the name was invented at Coffee Connection. Two of the three explicitly say that Starbucks' recipe came from Starbucks, and the third doesn't say where the Starbucks recipe came from.
 * I don't understand your notion of fusion. Yes, of course, fusion implies that you get ideas from two different places and combine them in some new way, not necessarily as a combination of the ingredients. And clearly the frappuccino has similarities to a frappe (it is blended, it is sweetened, but instead of ice cream, it uses ice and thickener). But what idea comes from the cappuccino? The idea of using espresso coffee rather than brewed coffee, perhaps?
 * Please feel free to continue to add more sources and details to the article — and removing questionable material when you find it. --Macrakis (talk) 22:28, 7 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Speaking of collaborative editing, it is generally considered a bad idea to blanket revert — that is, to revert to a previous version unselectively, removing both controversial and uncontroversial changes. For example, I had corrected "frappe" to "frappe" (formatting) and "a frappe is a term for a thick milkshake" to "a frappe is a thick milkshake" (WP:REFERS), which I trust are uncontroversial improvements. --Macrakis (talk) 22:42, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I would hope we don't ever reach a point where any modification to an article about frappuccinos could be considered controversial. Apologies for undoing that change. As for my contributions, like I said, feel free to modify them in any way, or even remove what you feel is incorrect, obviously. I just don't think it's very much in a collaborative spirit to outright undo people's contributions without first providing some justification for doing so. --TimothyDexter (talk) 23:50, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I thought my edit summary was pretty complete, but apparently not. --Macrakis (talk) 01:34, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

History doesn't match what's on the Starbucks website
Back in the 90s, I worked at Starbucks and back then they sent all new employees to "Starbucks school" for a week before letting them loose in the stores. I remembered a story about how one Starbucks worker across the country somewhere invented the frappuccino and it was such a success that they took it everywhere. I just googled it to try to get more details on that since it was 19 years ago. The history as described on this page totally contradicts what they told us in 1997. So I googled some more and found the version of events on the Starbucks page. https://news.starbucks.com/news/frappuccino-turns-20 It's still not exactly how I remember it, but it's definitely possible that they didn't tell us the whole story at Starbucks School. I don't know how to edit websites or anything, but someone should include the part about how they developed it in California in this article.

Coincidentally, I lived in Boston in 1997. If Starbucks considered it invented in Boston, I'm sure they would have mentioned that in Starbucks School that I attended there.

165.89.84.88 (talk) 21:07, 27 October 2016 (UTC)Adrienne


 * Companies' marketing and internal training materials are not generally a great source for company history. That said, the article does not, in fact, contradict the story on the Starbucks page. Our article says "The original Frappuccino beverage was developed, named, trademarked and sold by George Howell's Eastern Massachusetts coffee shop chain, ...The beverage, with a different recipe [my emphasis], was introduced under the Starbucks name in 1995...". The Starbucks page says "By the summer of 1994, Campion’s entire district was serving blended coffee beverages to enthusiastic customers looking for refreshment. Meanwhile Starbucks acquired The Coffee Connection in Boston, along with one of their products called “frappuccino,” a cold, slushy drink made using a soft-serve machine. Starbucks applied the name to its new blended beverage." They agree that the name comes from the Coffee Connection, and the current Starbucks recipe is different from the Coffee Connection recipe. The only thing that's missing in article — and which should be added — is the story of where the Starbucks recipe comes from. --Macrakis (talk) 22:11, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Frappuccino. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090526084202/http://www.pepsiproductfacts.com/infobyproduct.php to http://www.pepsiproductfacts.com/infobyproduct.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:43, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Ggnzalz (talk) 01:37, 2 May 2022 (UTC)Griselda Gonzalez, ggnzalz== Bottled Frappuccino ==

I am new to editing on Wiki. I have learned from an article, that although it is not needed to freeze the bottled frappuccino drink, if you are keeping an eye on it, it is possible to make the same frozen "blended" textured drink from Starbucks. After freezing for about two hours, you give the bottle one hard shake and it becomes frozen immediately. The drink does melt fast so you have to drink it quick. Here is the article that shows how the craze was found from a TikTok user. www.today.com

Unsure of how to properly source
Brand new to article editing! I was looking up Frappuccino history out of curiosity- I knew there were things that had come and gone prior to when I worked at sbux, and noticed some things were wrong or out of date by a while. Technically everything I edited is straight from Starbucks knowledge, but I don't know how to cite things properly when it's not like I have the recipe cards or pictures of items/ from registers on hand. Any tips would be appreciated. Midnightmuse1 (talk) 09:57, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

nvm I just hunted around after the fact. Midnightmuse1 (talk) 10:43, 26 November 2022 (UTC)