Talk:Freshpet

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging
This article talk page was automatically added with WikiProject Food and drink banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here. Maximum and careful attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories, but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns, please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 21:10, 3 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Pet food is not within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink. -- GentlemanGhost  (séance)  15:55, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

C Class
Article needs more inline citations. For example, the minimal processing section has no citations at all and contains a few statements which are likely to be challenged.  Puffin  Let's talk! 08:23, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Puffin,

Can I please get a response to my updates on Minimal Processing? I reached out to you on 12/2 but heard nothing back, and since have included citations on the entire section.

Re22lax (talk) 13:56, 16 December 2013 (UTC)re22lax

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Freshpet. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_31/b4044060.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150120070640/http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/2014/11/hoboken_resident_named_as_vice_president_of_the_marcus_group_inc_pr_firm.html to http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/2014/11/hoboken_resident_named_as_vice_president_of_the_marcus_group_inc_pr_firm.html/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150703200701/http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/2015/01/business_notes_freshpet_to_make_presentation_available_on_web.html to http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/2015/01/business_notes_freshpet_to_make_presentation_available_on_web.html/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://supermarketnews.com/Grocery_Center_Store_Brands/fresh_pet_fare_0704/

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) 06:08, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Request Edits February 12 2021
I have some suggestions for an independent editor to evaluate. The Wikipedia's Contact Us page says this is how I should handle these requests since I have a conflict of interest as an employee of Freshpet. 1. Please delete the sections “Marketing Approach” and “Viral Video History.” Marketing approach At the end of 2018, advertising analytics firm Ace Metrix named Freshpet's “The Story of Princess” TV spot as the #1 best storytelling ad of the year. “Princess” tells the story of Princess the pitbull, who was rescued from a fighting house by her owner, Kandi. In October 2018, Freshpet launched their Tattoo Pawlor event in partnership with First Class Tattoos in New York City. 10 pet owners were selected to have their pet's face tattooed on themselves, courtesy of Freshpet. In September 2018, Freshpet released “Pet Parents, Oversharing,” a podcast hosted by improv comediennes and pet owners Kaity Reagle and Andrea Shapiro. The 7-episode season explored the relationships people have with their pets. In September 2017, Freshpet released its “Picky Eater Approved” TV spot, which featured the story of Rudy the pug who went on a hunger strike until his owner, Mary Ann, fed him Freshpet.

Viral Video History In December 2014, Freshpet released its “Freshpet Holiday Feast” video, which quickly became popular with over 13M views. The video began the brand's holiday tradition of a releasing an entertaining video for animal lovers every December. On December 7, 2015, Freshpet uploaded the Santa Elves video on their YouTube page, garnering 1.7M views. The video was made in collaboration with the Salt Lake County Animal Services and Freshpet donated one meal of Freshpet food for every share the video generated. Other viral video releases from the brand include “Cats Vs. Dogs,” “People Eating Dog Food Without Knowing It,” and “Santa’s Elves,” a 2015 holiday video featuring social media celebrity Marnie the dog. In 2018, Freshpet released dual videos for the holiday season, with “Pet Parents Go Overboard for the Holidays” and “The Pup Who Stole Christmas,” which together amassed over 6M views. 2. In the “Products” section, please replace the second paragraph: “Freshpet also claims its food does not contain any processed meat meals or by-products, and is made in small batches at lower temperatures to preserve the natural goodness of the ingredients.” WITH: Freshpet ingredients are cooked in small batches in low temperatures, and have no preservatives. **Done. --SilverTiger12 (talk) 18:39, 12 February 2021 (UTC) 3. Please delete the “Minimal Processing” section: Minimal processing Unlike traditional shelf-stable pet foods, Freshpet ingredients are cooked once at lower temperatures. Thus, similar to less-processed foods such as milk, natural cooked meats and yogurt, the meals have a shorter shelf life.
 * Explanation: Both sections and their content are generally promotional and don’t fit well with WP:NPOV.
 * Explanation: Rewrites the sentence in a WP:NPOV and adds reliable sourcing to support the facts stated. The current sentence has no sourcing.
 * Explanation: Removes an unnecessary section - the information is better addressed in the Products section.

**Deleted. --SilverTiger12 (talk) 18:39, 12 February 2021 (UTC) 4. Before the “Manufacturing Facility” section, please add a new “History” section.


 * Explanation: Organizing articles to reflect standard Wikipedia best practices for articles about a business. See, for example, the WP: Good Article for Nestlé Purina PetCare.


 * Done --SilverTiger12 (talk) 18:50, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

5. In the new “History” section, please add the following as the first paragraph::

Freshpet was founded in Secaucus, New Jersey in 2006 by Scott Morris, Cathal Walsh and John Phelps, former pet food executives who wanted to create pet food with fresh ingredients and no preservatives. In August 2006, the company opened its first factory in Quakertown, Pennsylvania. Freshpet ingredients are locally sourced meats, fruits and vegetables.


 * Explanation: Updates article to include historical background of the company’s founding, early days and product-types. Includes reliable sourcing to support the statements.


 * Done --SilverTiger12 (talk) 18:50, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

6. Please move the following two paragraphs in the “Manufacturing Facility” section to be the last two paragraphs in the new “History” section:

“In 2013, Freshpet opened a new manufacturing facility, the Freshpet Kitchens, located in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania. This new $25 million facility was built to resemble human-grade manufacturing standards. Freshpet stock is traded on Nasdaq under the ticker symbol "FRPT".

In 2015, the company opened a new research and development center in the township. In 2018, it announced an investment of $100+ million to expand its pet food production operations at its current location. In February 2020, Freshpet announced that a new pet food manufacturing facility will be built in Ennis, Texas, which is expected to create 427 jobs. The state awarded Freshpet with a $2.0 million grant from its Texas Enterprise Fund. ”


 * Explanation: Organizes the article to reflect Wikipedia best practices (consolidating too many narrow sections) and adds more context to the history section.


 * Done. --SilverTiger12 (talk) 18:50, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

7. Please delete the section “Manufacturing Facilities.”


 * Explanation: Removes overly narrow section and better organizes the article to reflect Wikipedia best practices.


 * Done.--SilverTiger12 (talk) 18:50, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

8. In the “Products” section, please replace the first sentence: “Freshpet food makes refrigerated dog and cat foods and dog treats under the brands Freshpet select, Dog Joy, Vital, Nature's Fresh and Dognation.”

WITH:

Freshpet makes refrigerated dog food, dog treats and cat food under the brands Freshpet select, Dog Joy, Vital, Nature's Fresh, Dognation and Homestyle Creations.


 * Explanation: Rewrites sentence for clarity and adds missing reliable sources. There are currently no sources.

9. Please update the section “Philanthropic Efforts”

TO:

“Environment and Philanthropic Efforts”


 * Explanation: Updates header to better reflect the content of the subsection, which will include information about the company’s environmental practices.

10. In the new “Environment and Philanthropic Efforts'' section, please replace the two paragraphs:

“Freshpet operates its business, from wind-powered, landfill-free kitchens, to donate over 3 million meals to rescues and shelters across the US. In 2018, the company started its Fresh Start campaign, a charitable effort to raise awareness for over-looked shelter animals that face stigmas to adoption, such as breed types, disabilities or past abuse. As part of the campaign, Freshpet funded a new intensive care unit for the Animal Alliance of New Jersey, a shelter that specializes in rescuing high-risk cats and dogs that often need serious medical intervention.

The 2014 "Holiday Feast" video was a joint venture between Freshpet and the Humane Society of Utah to help animals find permanent homes. This collaborative effort was able to collect supplies and donations for many animal shelters. Freshpet also paid the adoption fees and provided the families with a supply of pet food to get them started.

WITH:

Freshpet’s facilities run on renewable energy and uses wind-power, landfill-free kitchens and a rainwater irrigation system. The company has collaborated with the Humane Society to help animals find permanent homes, and collect supplies and donations for animal shelters.

In 2018 Freshpet launched Fresh Start, a charitable program to raise awareness for overlooked shelter animals. The program gives grants to no-kill shelter and rescue organizations in the U.S. Thank you for your consideration. NJ0220 (talk) 17:42, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Explanation: Rewrites section to remove promotional language and unsourced statements. Adds missing reliable sources.


 * I went through and did two of the requested edits, but am cautious about doing most given as I do not normally edit these types of articles. Commendations for sticking close to Wikipedia policies, though. --SilverTiger12 (talk) 18:39, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I did a few more, but I'm not sure about all of it. It looks like the Environment & Philanthropic section you propose would only be three single-sentence paragraphs, which isn't very good. And I am also wary of completely deleting the Marketing & Viral Video sections, because those do seem to be notable facts about the company. --SilverTiger12 (talk) 18:50, 12 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your thorough review’ I know there were a lot of requests! Do you happen to have time to finish up? #8, #9, #10 remain unreviewed.  Also, could you consider the following:


 * Please delete the flag on top of the article, above the infobo - Advert|date=February 2021


 * 'Explanation: promotional content has been removed as a result of these Request Edits. The article is now significantly shorter and neutral.

Thank you! NJ0220 (talk) 19:01, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , some of the changes you requested were too promotional in their nature. I've gone through and pruned some of the language, and taken out some material which isn't relevant to an encyclopaedia article. I believe the language is now sufficiently neutral, and have removed the 'advert' tag.

Request Edit December 2021
Hi, I would like to propose some changes to the Freshpet article. I am an employee of the company so I can’t directly edit the page myself since that would violate the conflict of interest rules. This article, about a publicly-traded NASDAQ company with a $4.36 billion marketing cap (December 13, 2021) is currently a stub. The company, which was founded in 2006, has had substantial press attention and there’s no reason it should not be brought up to the standards of Good Articles for public companies, such as Hershey Creamery Company, large private companies, such as Chuck E. Cheese, or a directly analogous company, such as Nestlé Purina PetCare. As these Good Articles demonstrate, this can be accomplished without a page becoming promotional. Some previous cuts to this article seem overzealous in light of these GA models. Plus I found reliable sourcing for all the proposals below.

Could an independent editor please review these proposed changes? Thank you very much.

1.

The second sentence in the lead includes some jargony language about being “refrigerated at the point of sale” that is actually inaccurate and not supported by the source cited in that sentence (which does not use the words “point of sale”). Here is a proposed update to that sentence which fixes the issue:

Its cat food and dog food products are marketed as fresh, and need to be kept refrigerated.

2.

The third sentence in the current version of the lead has been tagged as needing citations. Here is a proposed replacement for the present version of the sentence; this new version contains only those pet food brands for which there is appropriate sourcing:

The company’s pet food brands include Freshpet, Dog Joy, DogNation, Vital, Homestyle Creations, Nature’s Fresh and Spring and Sprout.


 * I am revising Request Edit #2 here because the sentence I proposed modifying has since been entirely cut. Request Edit #2 is now modified as follows: Please add a new third sentence to the lead which reads: The company’s pet food brands include Freshpet, Dog Joy, and DogNation.


 * I have cut the number of brands mentioned from seven to the three biggest ones so the lead is e. informative but does not have a promotional list feeling. A primary source such as the Yahoo! Finance company profile cited here is acceptable since it is being used “to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge.” WP:Primary.

3.

Freshpet was the first company to distribute fresh, refrigerated pet food in North America. To reflect this, I propose adding the following new sentence to the lead after the third sentence in the current version:

The company was the first to distribute pet food in the fresh and refrigerated category across North America.

4.

The existing History section is very short and omits numerous noteworthy events in Freshpet’s history. I propose breaking up the second sentence and expanding on it with the following language, which incorporate the existing text but provide additional details about the company’s early history with appropriate sources:

The company opened its first factory in Quakertown, Pennsylvania in 2006. Freshpet’s early success was bolstered by the 2007 mass recalls of pet food products, which saw many pet owners turn to alternative brands that had not been connected with the tainted pet food. In 2009, Freshpet entered into an agreement with Tyson Foods. Under the terms of the agreement, Tyson acquired a minority stake in Freshpet, while providing the company access to its distribution network for refrigerated foods.

The company opened a new factory in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania in 2013. In 2014, the company began collaborating with the Humane Society to help animals find permanent homes, to collect supplies and donations for animal shelters. In November 2014, Freshpet went public, raising $164 million in its IPO, with a market capitalization of $447 million.

Since these are not available for free online, here are relevant excerpts from the two cited articles in The Record:

2009 article:

Tyson, the largest U.S.-based meat producer, said it will take a minority investment in Freshpet; the company wouldn't disclose any other details. Freshpet will use Tyson's distribution network for refrigerated products to expand its national footprint.

2014 article:

Freshpet, which had raised $164 million last month in an initial public offering, with shares initially priced at $15, said its adjusted third-quarter loss totaled 14 cents a share, excluding interest expense and $6.8 million in debt guarantee fees.

5.

The final sentence in the History section paragraph is missing a number of pertinent details about the company’s recent history. I propose incorporating that sentence as part of a new second paragraph for the section, which would also include additional details from the company’s recent history. Here is some suggested language:

Freshpet began to distribute its pet food products in the United Kingdom in March 2017, through the British supermarket chain, Tesco. The business announced an investment of more than $100 million to expand its pet food production operations at its Pennsylvania location in 2018. In 2018, Freshpet launched Fresh Start, a charitable program to raise awareness about shelter animals and to raise funds for animal rescue organizations. In February 2020, the company was offered a grant of $2.1 million from the Texas Enterprise Fund to build a plant in Ennis, Texas. As of December 2021, the company’s market capitalization was $4.4 billion.


 * I have revised Request Edit #5 to remove a sentence that is based on a possibly weak source.

6.

Please add a new “Products” section below the History section. An editor previously removed this section, but since it is in keeping with Good Articles for companies such as Nestlé Purina PetCare, Hershey Creamery Company, and Pearson's Candy Company to have a section about a company’s products or services, I propose that a new one be added. Removing it brought the article back to stub format instead of moving it toward a Good Article. The GA company format of having an extensive Products section is routinely followed for tech companies, for example. Lenovo Fitbit LG Electronics Canon Inc.. From a Wikipedia article best practices standpoint, the nature of the products should not matter. Here is suggested language for a Products section, which I have tried to write in a more neutral and less promotional way than the previous version that was removed:

Products

Freshpet provides several different pet food brands, including Freshpet, Dog Joy, DogNation, Vital, Homestyle Creations, and Nature’s Fresh.

Rather than shelved dried or canned foods, the company’s products are similar to refrigerated food for human consumption. The company requires its production facilities to operate at standards required for producing human foods. Freshpet main ingredients are meats, fruits and vegetables sourced from local farms. The company’s products have no preservatives and must be sold within 90 days of production.

Freshpet’s facilities employ several systems to improve environmental sustainability, including renewable energy sources to power the facility, landfill-free kitchens, and rainwater irrigation.


 * I am revising Request Edit #6 to remove two statements which are based on possibly weak sourcing.

7.

The revenue information in the Infobox is now out-of-date. Here is an updated version (with better sourcing):


 * revenue = $318,790,000 (2020)

8.

Please add a new Marketing and Advertising section to the article. I believe this section is in keeping with similar sections about noteworthy advertising in model Good Articles, such as Nestlé Purina PetCare, Noodles & Company, and Proactiv. Here, the source is The New York Times, adding to the credibility of the argument that this is significant.

Marketing and Advertising

In the early 2010s, Freshpet ran a multiyear marketing campaign advertising the company’s products lacked preservatives based on puns involving the names of dog breeds, such as a photo of a pug with a placard around its neck that read “Pug off, preservatives”. In 2013, Freshpet ran a marketing campaign in the United States to emphasize its use of locally sourced ingredients, which employed patriotic themes, music, and imagery.

Thanks very much for your consideration. NJ0220 (talk) 23:09, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Yellow check.svg Partly done: #1 and #7 done, #2 not done. The remainder appears to be promotional in intent if not in tone; please obtain editor consensus here on the talk-page for any or all of these changes. Please note that the merits or demerits of other articles have no bearing on this one. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:31, 29 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Justlettersandnumbers has closed this RE but I’ve re-opened it so the individually unreviewed Request Edits #2-6 and #8 can be considered.


 * Justlettersandnumbers seems to supports this (“please obtain editor consensus here on the talk-page for any or all of these changes.”) This is sensible since it was Justlettersandnumbers who cut this article down to a stub (e.g. | dif | dif | dif), despite it being about a multi-billion dollar publicly traded company with extensive high-quality press coverage (e.g., https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/14/business/media/freshpet-dog-food-promotes-products-sourced-in-the-us.html|New York Times] |Wall Street Journal |Newsweek |Philadelphia Inquirer). The unreviewed REs I have proposed would begin to build the article back up with better sources and a NPOV.  Under WP:COIEDIT policy, the “Request Edit” template is virtually the only mechanism for me as a declared COI editor to notify uninvolved, independent editors of a pending proposal. But by closing the Request Edit template within hours after it was posted, Justlettersandnumbers has blocked a review by other editors, locking in their preferred version of the article (contrary to WP: OWN) as well as making it very difficult to follow their instruction for me to get other editors to review this. I’m going to WP:AGF that Justlettersandnumbers didn’t realize the primary means for a declared COI editor to get independent editor attention is centered on having an open Request Edit template.


 * I want to briefly address Justlettersandnumbers’ broadly stated two-pronged rationale for the bulk dismissal of 6 of the 8 REs. First, Justlettersandnumbers says the proposal “appears to be promotional in intent if not in tone”. In fact, the presumed “intent” of an editor is not a criteria in determining WP:NPOV or WP:PROMOTIONAL – under WP policy, proposals are reviewed on the merits, not on assumptions about the editor’s intent. (WP:AGF and WP:COINOTBIAS.) Justlettersandnumbers doesn’t address Requests #2-6 and #8 individually (as is customary on the RE queue), so there has been no specific item-by-item NPOV analysis to address. Nonetheless, I have taken a closer look and have removed some statements and sources that might possibly be seen as questionable. Second, Justlettersandnumbers incorrectly states that “the merits or demerits of other articles have no bearing on this one.” This is not true. As the Manual of Style says, “The usual practice is to name and order sections based on the precedent of similar articles.” WP:Manual of Style/Layout. GA and FAs which are “similar articles” carry even more weight, especially for sections and subsections that are consistent across multiple highly analogous GA and FA articles. Here we have: (Nestlé Purina PetCare, Noodles & Company, Hershey Creamery Company, and Cracker Barrel).


 * I’d therefore ask that this RE be considered as unanswered and reviewed by additional editor(s). NJ0220 (talk) 19:11, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Second opinion
Hello can I ask that you review WP:TEXTWALL then look at condensing any of the unanswered requests above into a summary, by point, below (as in do not make amendments to the above points but start afresh). It is a marathon trying to work through both your initial requests, amendments and responses (which are not dated). Further please confine your comments to content, posts like this about highly respected editors are not helpful, if you have concerns about conduct take them to WP:ANI. Cavalryman (talk) 02:43, 20 January 2022 (UTC).


 * It seems like there is a more fundamental question to be answered about whether this article should be structured similarly to other publicly traded company Good Articles, or if the structure of similar articles is irrelevant, as JLN says above. I’ll start an RFC on the question because as you said, JLN is an experienced editor and a consensus should be required to reach a different conclusion. NJ0220 (talk) 20:13, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

RfC on use of Good and Featured Articles as structural models
Should Good Articles for similar companies to Freshpet be used to determine article structure, such as typical section headers and the implied choices of relevant content? NJ0220 (talk) 20:20, 22 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Yes
 * No

Discussion:

In denying a request to add structure and the implied content in line with Good and Features Articles, User:Justlettersandnumbers said: “Please note that the merits or demerits of other articles have no bearing on this one.” According to the Manual of Style, “The usual practice is to name and order sections based on the precedent of similar articles.” WP:Manual of Style/Layout. Freshpet is a dollar public company traded on the NASDAQ with a multi-billion dollar market cap. A review of GAs and FAs for large companies in the food sector comes up with the GAs Nestlé Purina PetCare, Noodles & Company, Hershey Creamery Company, and the FA Cracker Barrel. Therefore, these articles, or others of a similar nature, can and should be used as models for the name and order of sections - including the implied content for these sections. In this case, based on these similar GA and FA articles, the structure should be roughly as follows: See User:NJ0220/sandbox.
 * Yes. (Note, I have a COI, declared above.)

(Whether similar company pages can stand as examples for this company’s page is intended as an honest and objective question. I hope that by following the rules, acknowledging my COI, and respectfully continuing to submit revisions that adhere to editors’ feedback, my “intent” will not be presumed to be “promotional” as per WP:COINOTBIAS). NJ0220 (talk) 20:20, 22 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Bad RfC. There's no need to litigate such a broad and sweeping question for the purposes of this edit request. I agree with that the majority of your edit request looks and feels promotional. Although we appreciate that you go through the edit request process rather than edit as an undeclared paid editor, COI editors have no right to the implementation of their edit requests by volunteer editors, and large requests such as yours above are difficult and time-consuming to implement, which is why they should generally be broken up into smaller requests. Justlettersandnumbers did the correct thing by implementing the non-controversial parts of your edit requests and advising you that the rest of your proposal was non-actionable at this stage. My advice to you would be to close this RfC, refrain from litigating the application of policies and to come back with a new edit request that is more likely to get consensus and be implemented.  JBchrch   talk  21:50, 22 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Comment, beyond the requirement to adhere to MOS:STRUCTURE, the answer really is dependent upon a number of variable factors, and I think the limiting factor here has been a lack of sources independent of the subject. So no, not necessarily. Cavalryman (talk) 22:01, 22 February 2022 (UTC).


 * Bad RfC - They can be used as a starting point but do not need to be a binding RfC at this point. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 15:18, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

I have withdrawn the RfC and am submitting a more focused one based on the advice of editors here. NJ0220 (talk) 17:40, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Discussion
This is a rather difficult question to answer because no companies are 100% alike, even those that expressly work in the same fields and offer much the same product, so our coverage of each will vary on a case-by-case basis. At first blush, I was tempted to say yes, but the more I think about it the more I feel that to be a rather useless answer because to the extent to which Good articles within a certain topic area should resemble each other is either nearly so academic as to render any discussion pointless, or so vague and general that the outline one should follow for another article of the same type is almost instinctual and still does not bear any need for discussion. In trying to create a Good article one will naturally be inclined to look at others rated as such for ideas on how to do so; this is not necessarily policy or guidelines in action (i.e. an attempt to follow exact rules for the sake of complicity so as to avoid rebuke), but emulation of prior examples in the hopes of reducing workload and guesswork. Perhaps what I am trying to say is yes they should, but it's easy enough to do that it does not need codification. The extent to which we have done so, as implied by OP, seems sufficient for me. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist  (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 21:43, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

RfC on Restoring Freshpet Sections
Should either of the following revised sections be restored to this article?

NJ0220 (talk) 17:42, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) A “Products” section, containing information about Freshpet products that have been covered by independent, reliable press sources such as the Wall Street Journal and New York Times.
 * 2) A “Marketing” section, which describes the small number of marketing campaigns which attracted mainstream press coverage from the New York Times.
 * 3) Both #1 and #2.
 * 4) Neither #1 or #2.
 * 5) A combined "Products and marketing" section.

Survey
'''Option 3: Both 1 and 2. (Or failing that, Option 1 at the very least.)''' I have a COI, as disclosed above. This article has been cut down to a stub, with sections on Products and Marketing removed in 2020. A Request Edit in December 2021 in December 2021, to restore the sections with revised text that attempted to address previous issues with NPOV, PROMO and RS issues, was declined by the same editor who did many of the cuts in 2020.

Freshpet is a NASDAQ publicly-traded company. The company’s products have been covered in top-tier sources such as The Wall Street Journal, New York Times, and Newsweek. Virtually every Good or Featured article about a similar company to Freshpet has a section about that company’s products or services (e.g., Nestlé Purina PetCare, Noodles & Company, Hershey Creamery Company, and Cracker Barrel). According to the Manual of Style, “The usual practice is to name and order sections based on the precedent of similar articles.” WP:Manual of Style/Layout. A revised Product section might read like Request 6 in the recently rejected proposal for a Products section is in Request Edit in December 2021 (revised further down in the same proposal after feedback.)

A Marketing section is warranted here because Freshpet’s marketing has merited a full feature about it in the New York Times and because this is the section structure article about very similar companies such as the GAs for Nestlé Purina PetCare, Noodles & Company. A short revised Marketing section can be found in Request Edits #8 [above at Request Edit in December 2021. A longer version about marketing and “viral videos” can be found at dif. It is in part promotional and not well sourced, which is why I proposed a shorter version. But the old version includes additional reliable sources such as MediaPost, Bustle, and Mashable. NJ0220 (talk) 17:42, 25 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Since the crux of the RFC revolves around sources, the links to the sources should actually work so people can make an informed decision.
 * The New York Times link you have is incorrectly linked. Here is a working fixed link: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/14/business/media/freshpet-dog-food-promotes-products-sourced-in-the-us.html and here is an archived link that should work if you cant get past the NYTimes link: https://ghostarchive.org/archive/JG43l?kreymer=true
 * Same thing with the WSJ link: https://www.wsj.com/articles/more-pet-brands-target-owners-who-like-to-cook-their-own-dog-food-1401231914, with a archived link: https://ghostarchive.org/archive/N4rPT
 * Also, the diff link is not working. Here is the right one: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Freshpet&oldid=1006406587 Rlink2 (talk) 19:02, 25 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Use a combined section. We don't need "mini-sections" with paltry content that are not likely to grow.  I agree that if there's significant independent coverage of a product or campaign, it should be covered.  There's not really a policy-based reason to exclude it.  But it needs to be well within WP:DUE and WP:NOTPROMO policy.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  21:06, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge to the parent company, BC Partners. The NYT article is nine years old. Judging from the content, what was novel in 2013 likely isn't today. I consulted with my cat, Bo. He has no opinion on Petfresh but thinks the article and the image are aimed at dogs, and he is unlikely to suggest I try Petfresh. The WSJ article is eight years old, short, and fluffy.
 * The parent company seems to be a good merger target lately—Petfresh taken private in 2015 by BC but now up for a SPAC merger. Guess every little bit of coverage is important, eh? (Thanks for the repaired links, ) — N eonorange (talk to Phil) (he, they) 23:36, 25 March 2022 (UTC) —
 * The parent company seems to be a good merger target lately—Petfresh taken private in 2015 by BC but now up for a SPAC merger. Guess every little bit of coverage is important, eh? (Thanks for the repaired links, ) — N eonorange (talk to Phil) (he, they) 23:36, 25 March 2022 (UTC) —


 * This is false. Freshpet is already a public company (NASDAQ:FRPT). It is not owned by BC Partners, nor is it a subsidiary holding of any other company. It's not going to be brought public because it's already public. The article cited is over a year old and about a speculative, complex deal. It provides no rationale for merging this article into BC Partners.NJ0220 (talk) 21:01, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

"Covered by independent, reliable press sources"? Well then, by all means, include. Benjamin (talk) 04:24, 28 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Products: | The Wall Street Journal | New York Times | Newsweek Marketing: | New York Times (same article as above) | MediaPost | Bustle  | Mashable. Note: Rlink2 has provided alternate links, above, for sources behind paywalls.  NJ0220 (talk) 21:01, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I would personally like better sources than the New York Times. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 18:17, 5 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Comment There are 2 from 2018 and everything else is horribly old. I suppose those 2 are worth mentioning in 1 or 2 sentences. Does anyone have anything fresher? Invasive Spices (talk) 4 April 2022 (UTC)

As the RfC is almost over, and the consensus seems to be to add limited language, I’ve made some proposals for discussion below. Every editor from this RfC has been pinged. My intent is just to have a Wikipedia article at least somewhat similar to those other large public companies in this category (see above for a few GAs). Freshpet is not a subsidiary planning a public offering and it has no interest or intention to use Wikipedia for promotion. To start, one of the pivotal moments for the company came in 2007, when its competitors experienced a crisis where 60 million units of traditional cat and dog food were tainted with melamine. Freshpet's food was not affected which resulted in a sudden increase in sales, and both Newsweek and the Philadelphia Inquirer wrote dedicated articles about it (back when Newsweek was still an influential and widely-distributed magazine.) The following could be the second and third sentences in the History section: The company was the first to distribute pet food in the fresh and refrigerated category across North America. After a 2007 crisis of wet and dried dog food tainted by the melamine, Freshpet’s uncontaminated fresh food offerings experienced dramatic growth in the number of stores carrying its products. Next, it would be unusual not to give the date a company went public on a major stock exchange. This can be inserted in chronological order. In November 2014, Freshpet went public on the {{NASDAQ]], raising $164 million in its IPO. with a market capitalization of $447 million. Finally, as the last sentences of History, I think as a best practice a few of the company’s sub-brand names should be mentioned, as well as the basic fact that Freshpet sells fresh food without preservatives, requiring refrigeration. I know this will seem promotional to some – but if this was a video game company, the names and a brief description of its video games would be listed. Or on a car company page, the major brands it sells would be described. I think the principal is the same – this is just another multi-billion dollar public company, with multiple product lines. Some of the sources are older, but there’s been no radical change to the products that would warrant new profiles of the company in The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Newsweek or Philadelphia Inquirer. As of 2021, the company’s pet food brands included Freshpet, Dog Joy, DogNation, Spring & Sprout. Vital, Homestyle Creations, Nature’s Fresh and Spring and Sprout. Its cat food and dog food products are marketed as fresh, requiring refrigeration since the company’s products have no preservatives. The New York Times also ran two separate stories about the company’s marketing in 2008 and 2013. These articles show historical relevancy far beyond the limits of WP:NOPROMO. The events that have nothing to do with current advertising and don’t help the company now. It’s just part of the company’s history. It would be included if this article was being improved toward a GA. I wrote it as Request #8 here. Talk:Freshpet But I won’t suggest it again since there seems to be hesitancy here against historical articles. Thanks. NJ0220 (talk) 19:31, 28 April 2022 (UTC)


 * I don't see a promotion problem if that's what you're asking. Benjamin (talk) 03:08, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Same here, though there are typos in the proposed text.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  13:59, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

{{reflist-talk}}


 * {{ping|SMcCandlish|Benjaminikuta}} Since no one in this RfC has opposed the three suggested paragraphs above, I suggest it might be time to implement these and close the RfC. There has been no activity on the survey since Apr 5, 2022.  Do you agree?  If so, as independent editors, can one of you take the lead here? NJ0220 (talk) 17:17, 6 May 2022 (UTC)


 * I think I agree with you. The consensus seems to be the three paragraphs are good. @NJ0220 Rlink2 (talk) 19:20, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
 * On a closer read, "uncontaminated fresh food offerings experienced dramatic growth" is marketing language. We need a more neutral, less enthused way to put this.  "Offerings", like "solutions", is an ad-copy buzzword, and WP isn't in a position to emote that growth was "dramatic".  There are a few other copy issues, like repeating "pet food" and "dog food and cat food" too much.  If no one cares much, I'll just address all these issues and implement toned-down versions of the text.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  20:04, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
 * {{Done}}, along with some citation cleanup and such .  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  21:06, 10 May 2022 (UTC)