Talk:My Coke Rewards: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 14:23, 10 January 2010

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the My Coke Rewards article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

South Dakota Start‑class

	South Dakota portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Dakota, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of South Dakota on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.South DakotaWikipedia:WikiProject South DakotaTemplate:WikiProject South DakotaSouth Dakota articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Business Start‑class Low‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Nestea

Should it be noted that Nestea dropped their support of mycokerewards? This is note worthy, user: ace_ofgabriel 16:44, 30 June 2008 (UTC) 167.7.19.254 (talk) 20:46, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

controversy section

This section pretty much descends into waffle and personal speculation; I'm considering just deleting the second half of it, but could anyone who knows something about the case in question clean it up? Is the section even worth having; a dismissed frivolous law suit is a bit of a storm in a teacup, rather than a full "controversy" wimbledon andy 13:40, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added ^{[citation needed]} to sentence "However, it is important to note that many people drink Coke and are not obese because they take care of themselves and don't blame their personal failures on a soda" Stupidone0 (talk) 04:11, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

not all codes working

There are many codes that are not working. I have also 12 pack cans codes that are not working. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saudiqbal (talk • contribs)

Okay, what's your point? Termin8er850 22:23, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Add it in, sounds like good infoJokestrMike89 (talk) 05:15, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the codes printed inside 12 and 24 can packs, it's obvious that several very different machines are used to print them. The overall shape of the characters and/or the spacing of the dots are different. Some of them have problems with certain characters where it is difficult or impossible to tell what they're supposed to be. G and 6, B and 8, D and O or 0 are often hard to tell which they are. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bizzybody (talk • contribs) 20:52, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

iCoke expansion

Can the section on iCoke be expanded to include more details, such as limited brands (only on Coca-Cola, Diet Coke, and Coca-Cola Zero) or additional points opportunities (eg. Empire Theatres scratch cards)? --24.78.124.8 (talk) 22:43, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Limitations section

I fixed some parts of the limitations section, removing parts that were not true (you dont have to drink large quantities rapidy to accrue massive points; just be active once every 90 days), and I also referenced the terms and conditions from the Coke rewards web site. I think we can remove the flag that this section needs references now :) Slyfield (talk) 19:51, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The limitations section is a little biased. --68.61.167.226 (talk) 01:46, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am editing the the "limitations" section to include the facts and only the facts about the point redemption rate limitations. Discussions of whether or not this is fair, honest, and so forth belong under "controversy," IMHO, and that's where I'm moving it. I am also editing some of that text because I agree it is biased. I think we can eliminate the "bias" flag after almost two years... 69.171.176.91 (talk) 14:23, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Code security section

In this section is a quote of something Justin Hearn said 'privately'. If it was said privately, what's it doing on wikipedia? Is 'privately' just a bad justification for not including a reference? Does anybody know more about this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Angelastic (talk • contribs) 13:15, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Value controversy?

The skull candy earbuds mentioned are actually worth 30-35 dollars, as opposed to the 79.99 said in the article. This makes the difference in rewards point value not so great. I'm about to change that but should the whole section be deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sas556 (talk • contribs) 02:52, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know whether the section should be deleted or not, but I added a source for the Skullcandy price so that there won't be any controversy about that fact. --Angelastic (talk) 09:20, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I recently expanded on the section, since the values are changing dramatically, and added a constant reference (the price of the earbuds has not changed, just to point value on MCR). I like the whole section. It's minor, but at least it's not COMPLETE speculation or anything JokestrMike89 (talk) 08:02, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Points from McDonald's Monopoly online

When you land on Community Chest in the McDonald's Monopoly online game for 2008, you win 25 Coke Points. To redeem them, you're sent an e-mail with a code to enter at the Coke Rewards site. If you aren't collecting Coke Points, you can send those codes to someone else who is, then delete the e-mails. I hit that twice in one game session. My sister was happy to get 50 more points. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bizzybody (talk • contribs) 20:56, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Limitations

Is anyone really drinking ten 2-liter bottles of soda a day? .froth. (talk) 03:59, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Inflation

The inflation is worse than in Zimbabwe. At least in icoke.ca. Prices are going higher and higher with time. Maybe prices went up 4x in the last 2 years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.10.146.201 (talk) 05:02, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mycoke Rewards

 This is a fraud, they took all my points away and refuse to let me sign in to post more points on my account.  I will drink Pepsi from now on.

@@ Line 33: / Line 33: @@
 The limitations section is a little biased. --[[Special:Contributions/68.61.167.226|68.61.167.226]] ([[User talk:68.61.167.226|talk]]) 01:46, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
-I am editing the the "limitations" section to include the facts and only the facts about the point redemption rate limitations.  Discussions of whether or not this is fair, honest, and so forth belong under "controversy," IMHO, and that's where I'm moving it.  I am also editing some of that text because I agree it is biased.  I think we can eliminate the "bias" flag after almost two years...
+I am editing the the "limitations" section to include the facts and only the facts about the point redemption rate limitations.  Discussions of whether or not this is fair, honest, and so forth belong under "controversy," IMHO, and that's where I'm moving it.  I am also editing some of that text because I agree it is biased.  I think we can eliminate the "bias" flag after almost two years...  [[Special:Contributions/69.171.176.91|69.171.176.91]] ([[User talk:69.171.176.91|talk]]) 14:23, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 ==Code security section ==