Talk:Sugar marketing

Untitled
Pretty biased article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:e008:61:1ba8:a4e0:cc4a:c4ac:e770 (talk • contribs) 2017 (UTC)

Accusation of bias but no comments and supporting evidence
This article is flagged for multiple issues (e.g.: NPOV, "Systemic" bias, etc), but the Talk page offers no evidence or comments in support of the reported "issues". Could we know what exactly is being criticized here? Thanks! Mcrt007 (talk) 01:47, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Cwmhiraeth added these tags in March 2018, though I still don't see any obvious bias in this article. Jarble (talk) 14:31, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

I added back two templates a week ago, and after seeing this section I think I'll splash my reasons why I did that here; I hope this is sufficient rationale. Do-Drop (talk) 13:25, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Globalize template: Almost all of the specific examples used in this article are related to the United States of America, with only one specific example from another country (Mexico). I am aware there's a few mentions of the WHO, but there should be more information on how other countries have reacted and/or handled the sugar industry.
 * Update template: After glossing over the article, the most recent information I could find is from sources released in 2016. Newer sources should be used to assess any changes since 2016 to policies, and especially under "US nutritional labelling challenges" where it says this; "In 2016, the FDA enacted new requirements for US nutrition labels, which include calorie count in larger type and a separate line for added sugars. By July 2018 most manufacturers will need to use the new label." - Have they used the new label? The article doesn't say what happened after that.