Talk:Stop & Shop/Archive 1

Untitled
They bought Edwards in 1997. They wre bought by Edwards parent company, Royal Ahold in 1996.

DeMoulas chain purchase
The article as present mentions the DeMoulas chain nearly needing to sell their 60 supermarkets to Stop and Shop as part of their ongoing legal disputes. Not only does this have absolutely no citation (this is the one part of the Demoulas family saga that actually has news articles and information to back it up, leaving this supposed fact absent), it doesn't make sense from a business or legal standpoint, and as such has been removed. Pmo22 (talk) 15:50, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Strike
Added the current event of the strike situation. Feel free to add on, but please cite your sources. Tommy 15:26, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

The language, "In an attempt to avoid paying for healthcare, Union workers threatened to strike" was misleading, imho. The workers already pay a portion of their healthcare by way of copays. I think it's more accurate to say that they're trying to maintain their current contract language with respect to the health benefit. 131.229.221.127 15:42, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I understand your wording much better, thank you for correcting me. Tommy 15:59, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:SandSnew.jpg
Image:SandSnew.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:25, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * ✅70.195.186.216 00:34, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Health care / wages
I removed the paragraph about wages and health care; it was mainly stating how much the workers now make, and what their benefits are since the strike was averted...doesn't belong in an encyclopedia entry about the store chain. 17:38, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I disagree. My immediate reaction upon reading that a contract resolution was reached was to wonder what the terms were. To me, this provides context for the labor dispute. I do find it overly detailed for that purpose, though, and don't see where it benefits from being its own section. -Stellmach 17:44, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Stop-n-Shop
I'm not sure what this other unrelated chain has to do with Stop & Shop or why it is on their page aside from the similarities in their name, but the source is a link to a page that no longer works. 72.87.101.131 (talk) 01:59, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

New Contract Section - POV
The New Contract section says, among other things "...Stop & Shop and its five unions came to a surprising yet happy conclusion..." This is a blatantly POV statement. This whole section should be rewritten to conform with Wikipedia's standards for Neutral Point of View.--Crunch (talk) 13:47, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Are these sections (both the 2010 and 2007 negotiations) even worth including in this article? This isn't a directory of Stop & Shop activity. --CPAScott (talk) 19:38, 11 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I just took out "surprising but happy" and also merged all the contract stuff into one section, taking out a PR sentence along the way. I, too, wonder if any of the contract stuff is needed, but I'll leave it for those closer to the article decide. I am just a drive-by editor. Bellagio99 (talk) 16:33, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Original logo?
The logo at the bottom of the article referred to as 'original logo' is most definitely NOT the original logo...my estimate is that it was created around 2003-2005. Before that, the letters were more rounded, as seen here:

http://www.vector-logo.net/logo/Stop_%26_Shop-79813.html

And before THAT, at least back to the '70s, the letters were not all uppercase. It read "Stop & Shop", as seen as this defaced tractor-trailer:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/10073060@N00/3295378938/

I'm not sure how to change it in the article, since I don't know the date the previous logo was created. 99.98.221.223 (talk) 02:21, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Ahold USA corporate office?
The article references Ahold USA consolidating its corporate office in PA in 2010. Ahold's website indicates it presently has 2 main offices (PA and MA) -- https://www.ahold.com/Ahold/Ahold-USA.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keatleyjones (talk • contribs) 01:55, 11 June 2012 (UTC)