Talk:Lilt

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Notability[edit]

Does this page meet notability guidelines??

I think so. It's a major drink, such as coke or fanta, albeit not quite as influential. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.21.197.156 (talk) 18:30, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly it does.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 22:48, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kills sperm?[edit]

Apparently, it kills sperm...

Has this been proven? Does the info merit inclusion in this article? I think so... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.41.169.131 (talk) 19:36, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1996 date?[edit]

Lilt was available in the UK long before 1996. Why are there two dates - 1996 & 1975? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.173.75.235 (talk) 09:53, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging[edit]

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) 23:06, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other flavours[edit]

Do Mandarin and Mango or Banana and Peach still exist? I've not seen them for a very long time. 92.2.177.34 (talk) 20:21, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation?[edit]

Why does Lilt disambiguation link directly to this? Ptomblin (talk) 16:46, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lilt = Mountain Dew???![edit]

"Its USA Counterpart is Mountain Dew."

Sounds dubious to me, is this just personal opinion? They sold Mountain Dew in the UK a few years back before it was withdrawn- unless our version was very different to the US one, then I'm sceptical, since they tasted and looked quite different. On second thoughts, given how questionable this is, I'm removing it altogether. Ubcule (talk) 23:07, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

additions reference[edit]

there's a page on the coca cola website dedicate to this brand with all the 'nutritional/ information http://www.coca-cola.co.uk/brands/lilt.html I can never remember how to adit references!Adagio67 (talk) 10:15, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use candidate from Commons: File:Soft Drink.svg[edit]

The file File:Soft Drink.svg, used on this page, has been deleted from Wikimedia Commons and re-uploaded at File:Soft Drink.svg. It should be reviewed to determine if it is compliant with this project's non-free content policy, or else should be deleted and removed from this page. If no action is taken, it will be deleted after 7 days. Commons fair use upload bot (talk) 21:17, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lilt. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:22, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Recipe change date should perhaps be elaborated on?[edit]

Between 2008 and 2014, The Coca-Cola Company reduced the number of calories in the drink by 56% as part of its efforts to make healthier products in response to the British Government's Public Health Responsibility Deal.[2] The amount of sugar was also reduced alongside the addition of artificial sweeteners (aspartame, acesulfame K and saccharin). Maybe this should be changed to 'Since 2008' or a more specific year? As it could seem to imply that ingredient change was only until 2014 depending on how you read it. Incidentally some sources on the internet say the Lilt recipe change was around 2003 which would be even earlier than this. Sorry to link a tabloid! https://www.thesun.co.uk/money/5988229/new-sugar-tax-uk-fizzy-drinks-soft-drinks/#:~:text=While%20Lilt%2C%20which%20changed%20its,has%20avoided%20the%20tax%20entirely.

AF1990 (talk) 16:03, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Get a new picture[edit]

Main picture should show front of bottle not back of label Toonsip (talk) 01:28, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Article name[edit]

Shouldn't this article remain at Lilt, given it is about the former brand, rather than the current Fanta variety? Gatepainter (talk) 21:46, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The name have been changed so the current title is better. Panam2014 (talk) 22:53, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My point is that the entire content of the article is about the former Lilt brand, and the "history" section ends with Lilt being discontinued and subsumed into the Fanta brand.
In addition, I wouldn't have thought each flavour of Fanta would deserve its own Wikipedia article, and it would be better to leave this article as Lilt (because the former Lilt brand is what it deals with) and include a section on the Fanta page for the pineapple and grapefruit flavour. For example, Fanta Orange, Fanta Lemon and Fanta Exotic don't have their own Wikipedia pages. Gatepainter (talk) 11:25, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, I think the move was a mis-step, and Lilt would be the better choice per WP:CRITERIA. Edwardx (talk) 11:53, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Gatepainter and Edwardx: We cannot close the article in 2023 since the product still exists but under another name. For the other flavors, it is precisely because they have never been independent that a unique article is not justified (although it is possible that certain flavors are notorious). But the concern is that if we go back to the old title if the current name remains in force we will be forced to rename sooner or later. For now, all sources dating back to 2023 give the current name. So Fanta Pineapple and Grapefruit is the WP:COMMONNAME. Panam2014 (talk) 10:18, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A similar issue arose in relation to Roches Stores, which was taken over and subsumed into Debenhams Ireland. In that instance, there is one article for the original (discontinued) brand, and the article for the brand into which it was subsumed mentions that fact.

Similarly, when all the Superquinn shops were taken over and rebranded as SuperValu, Wikipedia kept one article for the discontinued brand and one article for the brand that took it over, with mention of the fact that it took it over.

This can be distinguished from the case of Opal Fruits, which was renamed as Starburst, because in that case, the distinct brand was kept and just renamed, rather than being brought in under another brand.

I still believe this article should be named Lilt, with a mention on the Fanta page for the new Fanta flavour. Gatepainter (talk) 12:08, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Gatepainter: It is not comparable. Supermarkets, even of competing brands, look alike. Here, it is the same product that has changed its name. Same like Opal Fruits. Panam2014 (talk) 12:14, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Gatepainter: Coca Cola claims that there are no change. Panam2014 (talk) 17:30, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Requested move 10 July 2023[edit]

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. Consensus clearly favors the previous title of Lilt being retained, as the article nearly only focuses on the brand. There is also a rough consensus that new content on the drink after the rebrand should primarily either go in Fanta, or if independently notable, a new article on the Fanta Pineapple and Grapefruit that is separate from this one. (closed by non-admin page mover) Skarmory (talk • contribs) 15:43, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fanta Pineapple and Grapefruit → Lilt – The original name of this article was Lilt and was changed without any prior discussion by a Wikipedia user to Fanta Pineapple and Grapefruit on 2 July 2023. The reason for the change was that the Lilt brand had been discontinued and the recipe had become one of the flavours of the existing Fanta brand. The entire content of the article relates to the former Lilt brand, and the history section ends with the brand being discontinued and subsumed into the Fanta brand. I propose that the original name of the article be reinstated, and any material relating to the new Fanta flavour be included on the Fanta page. Individual flavours of the Fanta drink do not merit separate Wikipedia articles, whereas a standalone brand such as Lilt ought to have its own article. A person looking for information on the discontinued brand would look for Lilt, rather than Fanta Pineapple and Grapefruit. Gatepainter (talk) 15:12, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Current name. The drink still exists.
Panam2014 (talk) 15:18, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. The move should have been discussed originally. WPscatter t/c 15:47, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Wpscatter: Even let's say the page is renamed. It cannot be written that the product has disappeared. Again, it still exists by Coca Cola's own confidence and claims that there are no change. See here. So writing that the drink does not exist after 2023 is an WP:OR. Panam2014 (talk) 17:26, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The "Lilt" brand does not currently exist. It was rebranded to the current article title. That isn't OR. A flavor of an existing soda brand isn't notable enough for its own article, and if the only argument that it is is that it was rebranded from a previously separate brand, that page should be for that brand. A note should be added to Fanta (if it hasn't already been) and anything to be added about this soda going forward should be added there. This page is about a discontinued brand named Lilt. WPscatter t/c 17:42, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Wpscatter: the article is about the drink too, which still exist. You could argue that Lilt is the name during 50 years and the commonname is still Lilt but not oth thingh. Panam2014 (talk) 17:52, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • In further support of reinstating the original title of the article, there is a section of the article describing the various Lilt flavours and sub-brands that have been available over the years (Lilt Pineapple and Grapefruit, Lilt Zero, Diet Lilt, Lilt Light, Lilt Z, Lilt Mango and Mandarin, Lilt Banana and Peach, Lilt Mango Flavour. None of these flavours or sub-brands have been continued and only the original Pineapple and Grapefruit flavour is available with Fanta. It doesn't make sense to have an article dedicated to a specific flavour of Fanta that refers to other flavours as having somehow been part of that flavour.Gatepainter (talk) 19:04, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Gatepainter: Additional flavors released after 1975 and discontinued before 2023 Panam2014 (talk) 21:56, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Gatepainter and Wpscatter make compelling cases. This should never have been moved to Fanta Pineapple and Grapefruit. Edwardx (talk) 21:13, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support this is clearly a brand article, not a particular flavour article. Other flavours not Fanta are in the article. The person who moved the article to Fanta may wish to start a *new* article on the flavour itself. -- 67.70.25.80 (talk) 23:05, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This is an article about a discontinued brand.
SportingFlyer T·C 17:25, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
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.

"Fanta Pineapple and Grapefruit" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

The redirect Fanta Pineapple and Grapefruit has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 17 § Fanta Pineapple and Grapefruit until a consensus is reached. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 15:57, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lilt has never been sold in the Seychelles[edit]

What kind of claim is this? Is it relevant in any way? Should there be a list over countries in which Lilit never has been sold? 2001:9B1:8826:0:98:128:186:71 (talk) 15:26, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lilt&oldid=1208180986"