Talk:Pepsi: Difference between revisions
→Edit request on 4 February 2012: fixed, thanks |
|||
Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
[[Special:Contributions/96.26.63.235|96.26.63.235]] ([[User talk:96.26.63.235|talk]]) 05:34, 4 February 2012 (UTC) |
[[Special:Contributions/96.26.63.235|96.26.63.235]] ([[User talk:96.26.63.235|talk]]) 05:34, 4 February 2012 (UTC) |
||
:Fixed, thanks. [[User:Materialscientist|Materialscientist]] ([[User talk:Materialscientist|talk]]) 06:05, 4 February 2012 (UTC) |
:Fixed, thanks. [[User:Materialscientist|Materialscientist]] ([[User talk:Materialscientist|talk]]) 06:05, 4 February 2012 (UTC) |
||
==Logo== |
|||
I worked for Pepsi when it switched from the previous logo to the current one. I believe it was 1998. This article shows the old logo running unit 1991 then a gap. Why? It would't let me edit but that 1991 date is not correct. |
Revision as of 01:08, 29 February 2012
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Pepsi article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 91 days ![]() |
![]() | Food and drink: Beverages C‑class Top‑importance | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Template:Drink portal selected
![]() | Pepsi received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
![]() | Pepsi was a good article, but it was removed from the list as it no longer met the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. Review: August 14, 2006. |
![]() | This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
Help
Islam is now allow to drink pepsi due to some pigs items is basic ingredient of this products I screwed something up on the page when I took something that was spam out of the article. I do not know how to fix it.
Flavour section
In reference to the flavour section, I figured the most likely way of portraying the various flavours were as one long list as it may become rather disputable to some if categorized another way. Of course this can become rather unwieldy though. I for one agree Code Red is virtually Mountain Dew with a variant kick, but I'm not so sure it may be the best way to go about it. Also, I see horizontal listing as obscurred when vertical makes it quite easy to see multiple flavours such as Pepsi, Pepsi ONE, Pepsi, etc. and cancel out all the Pepsis in my head rather having various colour patterns and trying to differentiate amoung how a group listing is separated. Perhaps this is all wrong though so I would like some council on what the rest of you think. Dtgm
Health concerns?
So, whatever happened with the whole "health concern" issue? I see that the section is still not on the page, but only other questions as to why, and not any answers. Thoughts? DarkOppressor (talk) 17:29, December 12 2008 (UTC)
Edit request on 4 February 2012
![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The third sentence in the third paragraph of the history section has an error: "Megargel was unsuccessful, and soon Pepsi's assets were then purchased by Charles Guth, the President of Loft Inc." The word "soon" or the word "then" should be removed.
96.26.63.235 (talk) 05:34, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
- Fixed, thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 06:05, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
Logo
I worked for Pepsi when it switched from the previous logo to the current one. I believe it was 1998. This article shows the old logo running unit 1991 then a gap. Why? It would't let me edit but that 1991 date is not correct.