Talk:Conagra Brands

1970s history update 6

Hi editors, I'm back again with another request, this time to add content from the Demolition of historic site section to the appropriate place in the company history. You can see the full idea I had here, but given the scale of the changes I thought it would be better to make requests in smaller chunks. I request that this be added after the current last paragraph in the 1970s section.

With this section, I cut a fair bit of information that was redundant given other rewrites (like Harper's position), was unsourced or couldn't be sourced to the NYT article listed (the NYT article came out in 1987, it couldn't have reported on the final result of the demolition that happened two years later), and information better suited to be in another section (the relocation to Chicago). My suggested content for the 1970s section is below:

In 1987, Harper threatened to move ConAgra's headquarters out of Omaha unless the city approved the demolition of Jobbers Canyon, a warehouse district located along the Missouri River. The district had been declared a historical site and its demolition was opposed by historical preservation groups, but the city ultimately capitulated, razing the district in 1989. As of 1994, it was the largest destruction of a historic site in the United States.

References

Overall, I think what I have done is an improvement, and most importantly, is verifiable, but am open to further discussion! Thanks for taking the time to review. RWConagra (talk) 16:50, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Approved This was a much needed improvement to the previously existing section covering this information, which was largely unsourced. Regards,  Spintendo  01:46, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

@Spintendo:, thank you so much! RWConagra (talk) 16:18, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

1970s history update 7

Hi editors, I've got another request, this time to add content from the Fraud and bribery section to the 1970s section. I think this would best fit after the current last paragraph in that section.

With this paragraph, I've reworked some of the information to flow a bit better and be more succinct per WP:SUMMARYSTYLE, added information present in sources used in this article but not included at this time, added the resolution of some of these events, and added and updated references. My suggested content is below:

−

In 1997, ConAgra pleaded guilty to federal criminal charges that its Peavey Grain unit illegally sprayed water on stored [[grain]] to increase its weight and value and also bribed federal inspectors. The company agreed to pay $8.3 million to resolve the charges, which included a $4.4 million criminal fine, $3.45 million as compensation for illegal profits and $450,000 to reimburse the [[U.S. Department of Agriculture]] for storage and investigation expenses. Conagra had also paid $2 million to settle a related civil case filed by a group of Indiana farmers. [[Multinational Monitor]], a corporate watchdog organization, named Conagra one of the 'Top 100 Corporate Criminals of the 1990s'.

+

ConAgra was found guilty of tampering with scales when measuring the weight of incoming birds from Alabama chicken farmers in 1989 and settled a [[class action]] suit in 1995 levied against ConAgra, [[Hormel Foods]], and Delta Pride Catfish for conspiring with other companies to [[price fixing|fix the price]] of [[catfish]], though no company admitted wrongdoing in the case. Two years later, ConAgra pleaded guilty in a federal case to spraying water on grain in its Peavey unit, fraudulently increasing the grain's weight to boost profits, and bribing federal officials. The company was charged $8.3 million for the case. It also settled a civil suit with farmers in Indiana for $2 million. ConAgra was named one of the "Top 100 Corporate Criminals of the 1990s" by the ''[[Multinational Monitor]]''.

Here's what the text looks like when rendered:

ConAgra was found guilty of tampering with scales when measuring the weight of incoming birds from Alabama chicken farmers in 1989 and settled a class action suit in 1995 levied against ConAgra, Hormel Foods, and Delta Pride Catfish for conspiring with other companies to fix the price of catfish, though no company admitted wrongdoing in the case. Two years later, ConAgra pleaded guilty in a federal case to spraying water on grain in its Peavey unit, fraudulently increasing the grain's weight to boost profits, and bribing federal officials. The company was charged $8.3 million for the case. It also settled a civil suit with farmers in Indiana for $2 million. ConAgra was named one of the "Top 100 Corporate Criminals of the 1990s" by the Multinational Monitor.

References

• Note: The Washington Post source used here is already cited in the article, I just included the full reference for visibility.

I know there is quite a bit there, so if editors would prefer that I break this request up a bit more, please let me know! Overall, I think this is an improvement and a more complete and accurate examination of events during the 1990s. I also think it flows better and is better aligned with WP:NOCRIT. Please let me know what you think! RWConagra (talk) 16:18, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Reply 31-AUG-2023

Below you will see where proposals from your request have been quoted with reviewer decisions and feedback inserted underneath, either accepting, declining or otherwise commenting upon your proposal(s). Please read the enclosed notes within the proposal review section below for information on each request.  Spintendo  21:16, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Edit request review 31-AUG-2023

ConAgra was found guilty of tampering with scales when measuring the weight of incoming birds from Alabama chicken farmers in 1989 and settled a class action suit in 1995 levied against ConAgra, Hormel Foods, and Delta Pride Catfish for conspiring with other companies to fix the price of catfish  Approved. though no company admitted wrongdoing in the case.  Declined. Two years later, ConAgra pleaded guilty in a federal case to spraying water on grain in its Peavey unit, fraudulently increasing the grain's weight to boost profits, and bribing federal officials. The company was charged $8.3 million for the case. It also settled a civil suit with farmers in Indiana for $2 million  Approved. ConAgra was named one of the "Top 100 Corporate Criminals of the 1990s" by the Multinational Monitor.  Declined. ___________

@Spintendo:, thank you so much! Your edits and changes make sense to me. RWConagra (talk) 16:17, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Request to move paragraph

Hi editors, now that the Fraud and bribery paragraph is updated, I have another request to move that paragraph (beginning with "ConAgra was found guilty of tampering with scales when measuring the weight of incoming birds from Alabama chicken farmers in 1989 and settled a class action suit in 1995 levied against ConAgra, Hormel Foods, and Delta Pride Catfish for conspiring with other companies to fix the price of catfish…") to the 1971-1999 subsection of History.

The resulting move would make the bottom of the 1971-1999 subsection of History look like this:

...

During this period, ConAgra was also criticized for some of its business practices, including the demolition of the Jobbers Canyon Historic District to build the company's new headquarters, the company's use of pesticides, sanitary and labor practices in its meat processing divisions and the pricing of consumer goods. In 1987, Harper threatened to move ConAgra's headquarters out of Omaha unless the city approved the demolition of Jobbers Canyon, a warehouse district located along the Missouri River. The district had been declared a historical site and its demolition was opposed by historical preservation groups, but the city ultimately capitulated, razing the district in 1989. As of 1994, it was the largest destruction of a historic site in the United States.

ConAgra was found guilty of tampering with scales when measuring the weight of incoming birds from Alabama chicken farmers in 1989 and settled a class action suit in 1995 levied against ConAgra, Hormel Foods, and Delta Pride Catfish for conspiring with other companies to fix the price of catfish. Two years later, ConAgra pleaded guilty in a federal case to spraying water on grain in its Peavey unit, fraudulently increasing the grain's weight to boost profits, and bribing federal officials. The company was charged $8.3 million for the case. It also settled a civil suit with farmers in Indiana for $2 million.

References

I think this would best fit after the current last paragraph in that section. Doing so will help the History section offer a more complete and accurate examination of events during the 1990s. Also, it flows better and is better aligned with WP:NOCRIT. Please let me know what you think! RWConagra (talk) 16:17, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

 Implemented  Spintendo  18:32, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

@Spintendo:, thank you so much! RWConagra (talk) 15:38, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

1970s history update 8

Hi editors, I thought I'd round out the 1971–1999 section with some notes on acquisitions made during the 1990s and revenue growth. This is largely new content, but there is a slight expansion on content that was in the article previously related to acquisitions from RJR Nabisco which was removed during a previous request.

By 1992, ConAgra's annual sales had topped $21 billion. The company continued to make acquisitions and launch product lines throughout the 1990s, including Marie Callender's frozen product line in 1994 and GoodMark Foods in 1998. Also in 1998, ConAgra acquired several brands from RJR Nabisco, including Egg Beaters and Nabisco's table spread unit, which included margarines under the Parkay and Blue Bonnet brands.

References

I think this does a good job of completing the history from these decades. Please let me know what you think! RWConagra (talk) 15:38, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

 Done Sources match requested content. @RWConagra: STEMinfo (talk) 21:50, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

@STEMinfo:, thanks for doing that! RWConagra (talk) 18:03, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

2000s history update 1

Hi editors, I've got another request for the History section, this time focusing on the 2000–2015 subsection. I propose updating the first sentence of that section based on the paragraph I had posted in my draft. I think this suggested text better fleshes out those early years of the millennium and is more accurate. It also relocates some text from the Genetically modified food section to keep a better chronology. Since this is so different from the single sentence I don't think a comparison would be especially helpful here on the Talk page. Here's what I propose:

ConAgra rebranded as ConAgra Foods in 2000. The first half of the ensuing decade was marked by the sale of the company's fresh and refrigerated meat units, beginning with the sale of its majority stake in Swift & Company to Hicks, Muse, Tate & Furst and Booth Creek Management in 2002. The Swift sale ended ConAgra's involvement in the fresh beef and pork industries. The same year, ConAgra joined a coalition of food producers and trade associations, including PepsiCo, General Mills, and CropLife International to defeat Oregon Ballot Measure 27, which would have required the labeling of genetically modified food in the state.

References

Note: the Omaha World Herald story is already cited in the article, I'm including the full citation here for visibility and to include the quote from it.

I've also included a press release in these sources. The release is already cited in the article, and I'm citing it in particular for the basic fact "The Swift sale ended ConAgra's involvement in the fresh beef and pork industries." I believe this is allowed under WP:ABOUTSELF but please let me know if I'm interpreting that incorrectly.

Thanks in advance for taking a look! RWConagra (talk) 18:03, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

@RWConagra Your request is not clear whether text is to be deleted, It just says you want to "update the first sentence". If by "update" you mean replace, then the deleted text needs to also be posted here on the talk page. If by update you mean adding text and not deleting any text, then that can be easily accomplished, but you need to specify between the two. Please advise. Regards,  Spintendo  05:48, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@Spintendo: Apologies for the confusion. I'm proposing to replace the existing opening sentence of the 2000s section with the following. This should make it more clear:

−

In 2002, ConAgra Foods sold its fresh meat operations under the name [[Swift & Company]] to [[Hicks, Muse, Tate & Furst]], Inc. and Booth Creek Management.

+

ConAgra rebranded as ConAgra Foods in 2000. The first half of the ensuing decade was marked by the sale of the company's fresh and refrigerated meat units, beginning with the sale of its majority stake in [[Swift & Company]] to [[Hicks, Muse, Tate & Furst]] and Booth Creek Management in 2002. The Swift sale ended ConAgra's involvement in the fresh beef and pork industries. The same year, ConAgra joined a coalition of food producers and trade associations, including [[PepsiCo]], [[General Mills]], and [[CropLife International]] to defeat [[2002 Oregon Ballot Measure 27|Oregon Ballot Measure 27]], which would have required the labeling of [[genetically modified food]] in the state.

Here is what the replacement text looks like when rendered:

ConAgra rebranded as ConAgra Foods in 2000. The first half of the ensuing decade was marked by the sale of the company's fresh and refrigerated meat units, beginning with the sale of its majority stake in Swift & Company to Hicks, Muse, Tate & Furst and Booth Creek Management in 2002. The Swift sale ended ConAgra's involvement in the fresh beef and pork industries. The same year, ConAgra joined a coalition of food producers and trade associations, including PepsiCo, General Mills, and CropLife International to defeat Oregon Ballot Measure 27, which would have required the labeling of genetically modified food in the state.

References

Let me know if that works! RWConagra (talk) 19:22, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

 Done @RWConagra: After swapping out press releases. We prefer third party sources. The information is shown to be more reliable, and it helps with notability. STEMinfo (talk) 19:43, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@STEMinfo:, thanks for taking a look! RWConagra (talk) 20:30, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

2000s history update 2

Hi editors, continuing my effort to update the History section, for my next request I propose replacing the second paragraph of the 200–2015 section with the following:

−

In 2006, ConAgra Foods sold its Chicago-area-based refrigerated meats business ([[Butterball]], [[Eckrich]], [[Armour & Co.|Armour]]) to [[Smithfield Foods]]. ConAgra maintained a presence in Chicago by moving its [[Hunt-Wesson]] business there from California.

+

In 2006, the company sold its refrigerated meats divisions, including the [[Butterball]], [[Eckrich]], and Armour brands, to [[Smithfield Foods]] for $575 million. ConAgra CEO [[Gary Rodkin]] said the sale was part of an ongoing plan to "streamline" ConAgra's offerings. The same year, the company moved its [[Hunt-Wesson]] operations in [[Irvine, California]], and split the unit between Omaha and [[Naperville, Illinois]]. In 2007, ConAgra removed [[diacetyl]] from its microwave popcorn recipes following reports that the compound was linked to cases of [[Bronchiolitis obliterans]].

On the page, it would look like this:

In 2006, the company sold its refrigerated meats divisions, including the Butterball, Eckrich, and Armour brands, to Smithfield Foods for $575 million. ConAgra CEO Gary Rodkin said the sale was part of an ongoing plan to "streamline" ConAgra's offerings. The same year, the company closed its Hunt-Wesson operations in Irvine, California, and split the unit between Omaha and Naperville, Illinois. In 2007, ConAgra removed diacetyl from its microwave popcorn recipes following reports that the compound was linked to cases of Bronchiolitis obliterans.

References

This does a few things, including cleaning up some language that wasn't really accurate about Hunt-Wesson, clarifying the sale of Butterball et. al., and moves content from the Diacetyl section up and trims it to focus the content on Conagra. Please let me know what you think! RWConagra (talk) 20:30, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Reply 25-SEP-2023

  Clarification requested  

1. "and moves content from the Diacetyl section up and trims it to focus the content on Conagra." Any text which is "trimmed or moved" (these are your words) needs to clarify what is being trimmed and from where it is being moved. Please advise. Regards,  Spintendo  20:54, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

@Spintendo: Apologies for the confusion. I thought it might be a bit confusing to put it all together, but I've done so below. This is not how the text appears in the live article, but should convey what I'm hoping to achieve:

−

In 2006, ConAgra Foods sold its Chicago-area-based refrigerated meats business ([[Butterball]], [[Eckrich]], [[Armour & Co.|Armour]]) to [[Smithfield Foods]]. ConAgra maintained a presence in Chicago by moving its [[Hunt-Wesson]] business there from California. On September 4, 2007, the [[Flavor and Extract Manufacturers Association]] recommended reduction of [[diacetyl]] in butter-like flavorings, such as those used in popcorn, due to cases of the potentially fatal disease [[bronchiolitis obliterans]] or "Popcorn Workers's Lung" appearing among plant workers exposed to diacetyl fumes, as well as in one case that involved a popcorn consumer. The next day ConAgra Foods announced that it would soon remove diacetyl from its [[Jiffy Pop]] and [[Orville Redenbacher's]] popcorn products.

+

In 2006, the company sold its refrigerated meats divisions, including the [[Butterball]], [[Eckrich]], and Armour brands, to [[Smithfield Foods]] for $575 million. ConAgra CEO [[Gary Rodkin]] said the sale was part of an ongoing plan to "streamline" ConAgra's offerings. The same year, the company moved its [[Hunt-Wesson]] operations in [[Irvine, California]], and split the unit between Omaha and [[Naperville, Illinois]]. In 2007, ConAgra removed [[diacetyl]] from its microwave popcorn recipes following reports that the compound was linked to cases of [[Bronchiolitis obliterans]].

References

To be clear, these sentences in the old text in the template come from the Diacetyl section in the live article: "On September 4, 2007, the Flavor and Extract Manufacturers Association recommended reduction of diacetyl in butter-like flavorings, such as those used in popcorn, due to cases of the potentially fatal disease bronchiolitis obliterans or "Popcorn Workers's Lung" appearing among plant workers exposed to diacetyl fumes, as well as in one case that involved a popcorn consumer. The next day ConAgra Foods announced that it would soon remove diacetyl from its Jiffy Pop and Orville Redenbacher's popcorn products." I am proposing it be replaced with " In 2007, ConAgra removed diacetyl from its microwave popcorn recipes following reports that the compound was linked to cases of Bronchiolitis obliterans." and moved to the History section as I think that's the place it makes the most sense.

Hope that helps! RWConagra (talk) 16:41, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

"This is not how the text appears in the live article, but should convey what I'm hoping to achieve" Unfortunately, what you're hoping to achieve is not conveyed with this request. The purpose of the {{TextDiff}} template is to show on the left-hand side the text as it currently appears in the article and on the right-hand side the text that is proposed to replace it. From your comment shown at the beginning of my reply post ("This is not how the text appears in the live article, but should convey what I'm hoping to achieve"), this is not how you've configured the template. You'll need to go back to the drawing board to configure a newer, clearer request for this to move forward. Regards,  Spintendo  22:57, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Archiving needed

This talk page has become too long to navigate and edit quickly. The COI editor, as the main editor responsible for its length, is urged to begin the process of automated archiving in order to make the page more manageable. Thank you in advance for your help with this. Regards,  Spintendo  21:02, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

 Done RWConagra (talk) 16:48, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Updated 2000s request

Hi editors, my last request proved to be too confusing, so I'm going to start a new one from scratch. I propose changing the second paragraph of the 2000–2015 section in the following way:

−

In 2006, ConAgra Foods sold its Chicago-area-based refrigerated meats business ([[Butterball]], [[Eckrich]], [[Armour & Co.|Armour]]) to [[Smithfield Foods]]. ConAgra maintained a presence in Chicago by moving its [[Hunt-Wesson]] business there from California.

+

In 2006, the company sold its refrigerated meats divisions, including the [[Butterball]], [[Eckrich]], and Armour brands, to [[Smithfield Foods]] for $575 million. ConAgra CEO [[Gary Rodkin]] said the sale was part of an ongoing plan to "streamline" ConAgra's offerings. The same year, the company moved its [[Hunt-Wesson]] operations in [[Irvine, California]], and split the unit between Omaha and [[Naperville, Illinois]].

On the page, it would look like this:

In 2006, the company sold its refrigerated meats divisions, including the Butterball, Eckrich, and Armour brands, to Smithfield Foods for $575 million. ConAgra CEO Gary Rodkin said the sale was part of an ongoing plan to "streamline" ConAgra's offerings. The same year, the company closed its Hunt-Wesson operations in Irvine, California, and split the unit between Omaha and Naperville, Illinois.

References

This will help clean up language related to Hunt-Wesson that wasn't really accurate, clarifies details about the sale of Butterball and others, and replaces the Tribune with the OC Register as the cited Tribune article didn't support the claim being made. Please let me know what you think! RWConagra (talk) 17:54, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

 Partly done The second sentence, which contained a comment by (then) ConAgra CEO Gary Rodkin pertaining to the company's "streamlining plan", was omitted. Regards,  Spintendo  19:01, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Diacetyl request

Hi editors, I had a request for the Diacetyl section. It seems to me that most of the content there isn't really related to Conagra, so I suggest trimming it down to keep the content focused on Conagra. Here's what I'm thinking:

−

On September 4, 2007, the [[Flavor and Extract Manufacturers Association]] recommended reduction of [[diacetyl]] in butter-like flavorings, such as those used in popcorn, due to cases of the potentially fatal disease [[bronchiolitis obliterans]] or "Popcorn Workers's Lung" appearing among plant workers exposed to diacetyl fumes, as well as in one case that involved a popcorn consumer. The next day ConAgra Foods announced that it would soon remove diacetyl from its [[Jiffy Pop]] and [[Orville Redenbacher's]] popcorn products.

+

In 2007, ConAgra removed [[diacetyl]] from its microwave popcorn recipes following reports that the compound was linked to cases of [[Bronchiolitis obliterans]].

References

I think this keeps the content more focused on Conagra itself and changes the source to confirm that the changes did in fact happen, rather than just saying an announcement was made. Please let me know what you think! RWConagra (talk) 21:33, 2 October 2023 (UTC) Arjayay (talk) 21:44, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

 Declined The text as it now exists in the article is much clearer in discussing the information than the requested prose is. Regards,  Spintendo  23:04, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look! Also thanks to Arjayay and Dialectric for fixing my error. RWConagra (talk) 20:33, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

2000s request 3

Hi editors, I had another request to make updates to the 2000–2015 section. For this request, I suggest significantly expanding the third paragraph, which is currently a single sentence.

−

In 2007, ConAgra acquired [[Watts Brothers Farms]], a vegetable processing and agricultural operation, including an organic dairy.

+

In the latter half of the 2000s and into the 2010s, ConAgra began acquiring more companies as it shifted its focus to packaged foods. ConAgra purchased Watts Brothers Farms from [[Don Watts (farmer)|Don Watts]] to bolster its Lamb Weston division in 2008 and purchased [[Ralcorp]] in 2012. Also in 2012, the company joined with PepsiCo, [[Walmart]] and approximately 20 other food firms to defeat [[2012 California Proposition 37|Proposition 37]], a California [[ballot measure]] which would have mandated the labeling of genetically modified foods. In 2014, ConAgra acquired TaiMei Potato Industry Limited, an [[Inner Mongolia|Inner Mongolian]] potato processor, to further bolster Lamb Weston. ConAgra sold Ralcorp to [[TreeHouse Foods]] for $2.7 billion in 2015 and purchased Blake's All Natural Foods the same year. ConAgra spun off Lamb Weston into an independent company in 2016.

Rendered, the new paragraph looks like this:

In the latter half of the 2000s and into the 2010s, ConAgra began acquiring more companies as it shifted its focus to packaged foods. ConAgra purchased Watts Brothers Farms from Don Watts to bolster its Lamb Weston division in 2008 and purchased Ralcorp in 2012. Also in 2012, the company joined with PepsiCo, Nestlé and other food firms to defeat Proposition 37, a California ballot measure which would have mandated the labeling of genetically modified foods. The following year, Conagra joined with Walmart and approximately 20 other companies to seek the establishment of national labeling standards for genetically modified foods. In 2014, ConAgra acquired TaiMei Potato Industry Limited, an Inner Mongolian potato processor, to further bolster Lamb Weston. ConAgra sold Ralcorp to TreeHouse Foods for $2.7 billion in 2015 and purchased Blake's All Natural Foods the same year. ConAgra spun off Lamb Weston into an independent company in 2016.

References

This is pretty much a total overhaul of what that paragraph was. It adds more content related to acquisitions and sales during the late 00s and early 10s. It also adds sentences related to Prop. 37 and GMO labeling as fits within the timeline.

Please let me know what you think and if you have any questions! RWConagra (talk) 20:33, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

 Declined (See WP:INTEGRITY.)

1. The proposed text ConAgra purchased Watts Brothers Farms from Don Watts to bolster its Lamb Weston division in 2008 and purchased Ralcorp in 2012.[4][5] is not cited correctly. Citation 4 is dated 2008, yet it is placed at the end of a sentence containing information that occurred in 2012.
2. The proposed text ConAgra sold Ralcorp to TreeHouse Foods for $2.7 billion in 2015 and purchased Blake's All Natural Foods the same year.[8][9] is not cited correctly. Citation 8 says nothing about Blake's All Natural Foods, yet it is placed at the end of the sentence which contains that claim.

Regards,  Spintendo  21:17, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for looking! I will fix that in a new request. RWConagra (talk) 19:34, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

References

2000s request 3 source placement update

Hi editors, I am back with updated source placement per the last comment on a previous request. This request is to replace the current third paragraph of the 2000–2015 section with new text that further expands on events during the mid 00s and early 2010s.

−

In 2007, ConAgra acquired [[Watts Brothers Farms]], a vegetable processing and agricultural operation, including an organic dairy.

+

In the latter half of the 2000s and into the 2010s, ConAgra began acquiring more companies as it shifted its focus to packaged foods. ConAgra purchased Watts Brothers Farms from [[Don Watts (farmer)|Don Watts]] to bolster its Lamb Weston division in 2008 and purchased [[Ralcorp]] in 2012. Also in 2012, the company joined with PepsiCo, [[Walmart]] and approximately 20 other food firms to defeat [[2012 California Proposition 37|Proposition 37]], a California [[ballot measure]] which would have mandated the labeling of genetically modified foods. In 2014, ConAgra acquired TaiMei Potato Industry Limited, an [[Inner Mongolia|Inner Mongolian]] potato processor, to further bolster Lamb Weston. ConAgra sold Ralcorp to [[TreeHouse Foods]] for $2.7 billion in 2015 and purchased Blake's All Natural Foods the same year. ConAgra spun off Lamb Weston into an independent company in 2016.

Rendered, the new paragraph looks like this:

In the latter half of the 2000s and into the 2010s, ConAgra began acquiring more companies as it shifted its focus to packaged foods. ConAgra purchased Watts Brothers Farms from Don Watts to bolster its Lamb Weston division in 2008 and purchased Ralcorp in 2012. Also in 2012, the company joined with PepsiCo, Nestlé and other food firms to defeat Proposition 37, a California ballot measure which would have mandated the labeling of genetically modified foods. The following year, Conagra joined with Walmart and approximately 20 other companies to seek the establishment of national labeling standards for genetically modified foods. In 2014, ConAgra acquired TaiMei Potato Industry Limited, an Inner Mongolian potato processor, to further bolster Lamb Weston. ConAgra sold Ralcorp to TreeHouse Foods for $2.7 billion in 2015 and purchased Blake's All Natural Foods the same year. ConAgra spun off Lamb Weston into an independent company in 2016.

References

That should meet WP:INTEGRITY. Please let me know what you think and if you have any questions! RWConagra (talk) 19:34, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for correcting the integrity issues, I see no more concerns there. However, there is a word that is used in the request twice, the word "bolster". This is a subjective word with unclear meaning and purpose. I would prefer that another word and/or an enhanced explanation covering whatever intent you're wishing to convey in the two sentences which currently use this word. Please advise. Regards,  Spintendo  18:28, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Sure, I think "grow" conveys the same meaning in this context. The acquisitions in both instances made Lamb Weston larger, so "grow" works as well. It would look like this (bold added):

In the latter half of the 2000s and into the 2010s, ConAgra began acquiring more companies as it shifted its focus to packaged foods. ConAgra purchased Watts Brothers Farms from Don Watts to grow its Lamb Weston division in 2008 and purchased Ralcorp in 2012. Also in 2012, the company joined with PepsiCo, Nestlé and other food firms to defeat Proposition 37, a California ballot measure which would have mandated the labeling of genetically modified foods. The following year, Conagra joined with Walmart and approximately 20 other companies to seek the establishment of national labeling standards for genetically modified foods. In 2014, ConAgra acquired TaiMei Potato Industry Limited, an Inner Mongolian potato processor, to further grow Lamb Weston. ConAgra sold Ralcorp to TreeHouse Foods for $2.7 billion in 2015 and purchased Blake's All Natural Foods the same year. ConAgra spun off Lamb Weston into an independent company in 2016.

References

Let me know what you think of that! RWConagra (talk) 16:11, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Reply 10-OCT-2023

  Edit request implemented  

• Commentary-type text such as that discussing "growth" and "bolstering" was omitted entirely.

Regards,  Spintendo  23:48, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

That works for me, thanks for making the change! RWConagra (talk) 20:46, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Genetically modified foods request

Hi editors, for my next request I ask that we remove the Genetically modified foods section. The section is now redundant with the recent changes made to the 2000–2015 section, as the same information is now in the first and third paragraphs, albeit summarized a bit to keep it more on topic. It also seems that having that content in a separate section goes against the spirit of WP:STRUCTURE, which says that "Segregation of text or other content into different regions or subsections, based solely on the apparent POV of the content itself, may result in an unencyclopedic structure" and that editors should "Try to achieve a more neutral text by folding debates into the narrative, rather than isolating them into sections that ignore or fight against each other."

With the way content has been placed into the 2000–2015 section, it has been effectively folded into the narrative and better meets the ideal set forth by WP:STRUCTURE than the current article structure. Can we remove the Genetically modified foods section?

Please let me know what you think! As always because of my COI I won't make that change myself. RWConagra (talk) 20:46, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Reply 11-OCT-2023

Unfortunately, I can't take your word for it that the text has been "folded" into other sections. I'm going to need to see proof from the article that this has occurred. This can be done by submitting a request which has been broken into two portions: one section showing the text from the proposed deleted portion, and the other section showing where that text has been emplaced/summarized elsewhere within the article, as shown below:

COMPARISON OF TEXTS

Text as it appears now in the Proposed deleted section	Text as it now appears and/or is summarized in Other sections
Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus.	Ut enim ad minima veniam, quis nostrum exercitationem ullam corporis suscipit laboriosam, nisi ut aliquid ex ea commodi consequatur? Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Quis autem vel eum iure reprehenderit qui in ea voluptate velit esse quam nihil molestiae consequatur, vel illum qui dolorem eum fugiat quo voluptas nulla pariatur
Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.	Nemo enim ipsam voluptatem quia voluptas sit aspernatur aut odit aut fugit, sed quia consequuntur magni dolores eos qui ratione voluptatem sequi nesciunt. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Sed ut perspiciatis unde omnis iste natus error sit voluptatem accusantium doloremque laudantium, totam rem aperiam, eaque ipsa quae ab illo inventore veritatis et quasi architecto beatae vitae dicta sunt explicabo.
At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga.	Temporibus autem quibusdam et aut officiis debitis aut rerum necessitatibus saepe eveniet ut et voluptates repudiandae sint et molestiae non recusandae. At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.

The COI editor is asked to submit an edit request which calls attention to the sections of text within the existing article that, because they exist, justify the removal of the section in question. Please note that I am aware that certain sections aren't repeated verbatim because of paraphrasing changes that may have been made. The COI editor stated in their request "the same information is now in the first and third paragraphs, albeit summarized a bit to keep it more on topic." The reviewer is asking to see proof of those sections and summarizations shown here on the talk page before anything is deleted as per the request. Please open a new edit request which supplies this proof at your earliest convenience when ready to proceed. Regards,  Spintendo  21:30, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Sure, simple enough! RWConagra (talk) 19:40, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Updated Genetically modified foods request

Hi editors, I'm back with the request for the Genetically modified foods section with the table as requested by Spintendo. In short, this request is to delete the Genetically modified foods section as it is now redundant after recent changes were made to other portions of the article and the remaining section has some significant problems related to verifiability. The table comparing the section to the text in the 2000–2015 section is below.

COMPARISON OF TEXTS

Text as it appears now in the proposed to be deleted Genetically modified foods section	Text as it now appears and/or is summarized in 2000–2015: From meatpacking to packaged goods
In 2002, Conagra and other major food and beverage companies including PepsiCo, General Mills, Kelloggs, Sara Lee, and H. J. Heinz Co. spent millions to defeat Oregon Ballot Measure 27, which would have required food companies to label products that contain genetically modified ingredients. According to the Oregon Secretary of State, ConAgra contributed $71,000 to the campaign to defeat the state ballot initiative.	ConAgra rebranded as ConAgra Foods in 2000. The first half of the ensuing decade was marked by the sale of the company's fresh and refrigerated meat units, beginning with the sale of its majority stake in Swift & Company to Hicks, Muse, Tate & Furst and Booth Creek Management in 2002. The Swift sale ended ConAgra's involvement in the fresh beef and pork industries. The same year, ConAgra joined a coalition of food producers and trade associations, including PepsiCo, General Mills, and CropLife International to defeat Oregon Ballot Measure 27, which would have required the labeling of genetically modified food in the state.
Throughout 2012, ConAgra contributed $1,176,700 to a $46 million political campaign known as the Coalition Against the Costly Food Labeling Proposition, sponsored by food producers. The organization's goal was to oppose the California citizen's initiative, known as Proposition 37, demanding mandatory labeling of foods containing genetically modified ingredients. Although the proposition was defeated, there was strong consumer backlash against the coalition's opposition. Consumer advocates encouraged nationwide boycotts of coalition members, and movements were started in several other states to enact similar labeling requirements. As a result, ConAgra and others in the Coalition met with Walmart (the largest food retailer in the U.S.) to seek a nationwide labeling system for genetically modified foods, instead of trying to defeat the measures in every state.	In 2008, ConAgra purchased Watts Brothers Farms from Don Watts and purchased Ralcorp in 2012. Also in 2012, the company joined with PepsiCo, Nestlé and other food firms to defeat Proposition 37, a California ballot measure which would have mandated the labeling of genetically modified foods. The following year, Conagra joined with Walmart and approximately 20 other companies to seek the establishment of national labeling standards for genetically modified foods. In 2014, ConAgra acquired TaiMei Potato Industry Limited, an Inner Mongolian potato processor. ConAgra sold Ralcorp to TreeHouse Foods for $2.7 billion in 2015 and purchased Blake's All Natural Foods the same year. ConAgra spun off Lamb Weston into an independent company in 2016.

References

I think it's also worth noting that the current Genetically modified foods section has some significant issues.

• None of the snapshots (1, 2, 3) around the time source 58 in the live article was retrieved say anything about a donation, so that sentence is not verified by sourcing
• Source 59 in the live article does not mention Conagra at all. The paragraph beginning with "Throughout 2012" is not verified by sourcing
• Source 60 in the live article does not directly support several of the assertions made:
  • "strong consumer backlash" – not supported by the source, arguably could be considered original research
  • "consumer advocates encouraged nationwide boycotts" – the source doesn't say this, only that boycotts happened
  • "movements were started in several other states to enact similar labeling requirements" – the source doesn't say this, only that there were proposals being discussed in about 20 states. I'd also argue that "movements" in this context is non-neutral wording
  • "As a result, ConAgra and others in the Coalition" – the source does not say anything about membership in the Coalition being referred to here. Coalition membership in relation to this ballot measure is also unsupported as noted in relation to Source 59
  • "instead of trying to defeat the measures in every state." – the source does not say this, and mentions no plans to try to defeat ballot measures elsewhere. This is not supported and would likely qualify as WP:OR

I'd also like to note again, as I did in my previous request, that I think separating this content out in the manner it was separated out violates WP:STRUCTURE.

I hope that helps clear things up! Please let me know what you think! RWConagra (talk) 19:40, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Approved Thank you for providing the information as I have requested. As you can see, it was helpful in both illuminating the requested changes as a whole, as well as to help in fleshing out additional reasonings for the changes that weren't necessarily provided by you in your first request. I can see that the references provided for the contribution claims in the genetically modified foods section weren't substantiated, and that the bulk of the information is better handled elsewhere. So this change is approved. Regards,  Spintendo  23:13, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for doing that! RWConagra (talk) 14:26, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Environmental issues request

Hi editors, I was looking at the Environmental issues subsection and thought it would be possible to make a few improvements related to accuracy and sourcing. Here's what I was thinking.

−

Conagra has been criticized for its lack of response to global [[climate change]]. A 2006 report by [[Ceres (organization)|Ceres]], a non-profit organization that works to address global climate change and other [[sustainability]] issues, entitled "Corporate Governance and Climate Change: Making the Connection", measures how 100 leading global companies are responding to global warming. Companies in the report were evaluated on a 0 to 100 scale. ConAgra scored a total of 4 points, the lowest of any of the food companies rated. In a 2009 ranking by ''[[Newsweek]]'', ConAgra ranked 342nd out of U.S. 500 largest corporations in terms of overall environmental score.In 2003–2004, ConAgra participated in a [[Minnesota Pollution Control Agency]] voluntary investigation and clean-up program. Through the program, the company cleaned up a property previously used for [[lithium]] ore processing and constructed a new 80,000-square-foot (7,000 m<sup>2</sup>) office/warehouse building. This voluntary program offers "future liability protection". O January 7, 2014, a California Superior Court found that ConAgra and its co-defendants were liable in creating a public nuisance due to lead-based paint the companies sold. Ten local governments in California filed the suit and the court ordered Conagra, [[NL Industries]] and [[Sherwin-Williams]] to pay $1.15 billion to remove or abate the lead in homes located in those cities and counties. Although ConAgra never produced paint, it assumed the liabilities of W. P. Fuller & Co., a San Francisco-based paint producer, through a series of acquisitions. The disposition of ''The People v. ConAgra Grocery Products Company et al.'' in the California sixth Appellate District Court on November 14, 2017, is that <blockquote class="templatequote " >... the judgment is reversed, and the matter is remanded to the trial court with directions to (1) recalculate the amount of the abatement fund to limit it to the amount necessary to cover the cost of remediating pre-1951 homes, and (2) hold an evidentiary hearing regarding the appointment of a suitable receiver. The Plaintiff shall recover its costs on appeal.</blockquote>

+

During the 2000s and 2010s, ConAgra faced further scrutiny for its practices. It received low marks on environmental stewardship from [[Ceres (organization)|Ceres]] and ''[[Newsweek]]'', with the company ranking 342nd of 500 on the latter's inaugural "Green Rankings" list. In 2013, a [[California]] judge ordered ConAgra, along with [[Sherwin-Williams]] and [[NL Industries]], to pay $1.1 billion for the renovation of homes in 10 California counties which had been painted with [[lead paint]] sold by the companies. ConAgra was named a defendant in the suit as it had assumed the liabilities of W.P. Fuller & Co. following a series of mergers; after multiple appeals, the company reached a settlement amount of $305 million in 2019.

When fully rendered, it looks like this:

During the 2000s and 2010s, ConAgra faced further scrutiny for its practices. It received low marks on environmental stewardship from Ceres and Newsweek, with the company ranking 342nd of 500 on the latter's inaugural "Green Rankings" list. In 2013, a California judge ordered ConAgra, along with Sherwin-Williams and NL Industries, to pay $1.1 billion for the renovation of homes in 10 California counties which had been painted with lead paint sold by the companies. ConAgra was named a defendant in the suit as it had assumed the liabilities of W.P. Fuller & Co. following a series of mergers; after multiple appeals, the company reached a settlement amount of $305 million in 2019.

References

This request is asking to change quite a few things, so I'll try to break it down a bit here:

• Significantly trims content related to Ceres. I couldn't find the report cited here and there is a lot of information in the live text that isn't on topic and not necessary according to WP:SUMMARYSTYLE. I did find an outside source talking about the report, so I replaced the citation with that third-party source.
• Modifies the Newsweek sentence to better fit a new source. Like the Ceres content, I couldn't find the original source, but was able to locate a third-party article that discusses the ranking and added it here.
• Removes the MPCA clean-up paragraph. I couldn't find a third-party source for this content and it's my understanding that the content should not remain under current sourcing guidelines.
• Reworks the content related to the W.P. Fuller lawsuit. The content in the live article is not verified by the sources used (the date is wrong, for one thing) and is incomplete. I've reworked the old content, removed the block quote from an intermediary judgment as it is more confusing than helpful to understanding the situation, and added content and a source for the final resolution.

Please let me know what you think! Eventually, I'd like to propose moving this content to the 2000–2015 section. If you're curious about my overall hopes for the section, I did upload a draft and diff here. RWConagra (talk) 14:26, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

You've provided the fully rendered text to be added, but if you could provide the fully rendered text to be removed that would be appreciated, instead of having to hunt and peck the references from the infuriating {{textdiff}} template (which by design, omits references). Thanks so much for your help. Regards,  Spintendo  02:56, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

I think I understand what you're asking for. I'll do my best here!

Old
Conagra has been criticized for its lack of response to global climate change. A 2006 report by Ceres, a non-profit organization that works to address global climate change and other sustainability issues, entitled "Corporate Governance and Climate Change: Making the Connection", measures how 100 leading global companies are responding to global warming. Companies in the report were evaluated on a 0 to 100 scale. ConAgra scored a total of 4 points, the lowest of any of the food companies rated. In a 2009 ranking by Newsweek, ConAgra ranked 342nd out of U.S. 500 largest corporations in terms of overall environmental score.In 2003–2004, ConAgra participated in a Minnesota Pollution Control Agency voluntary investigation and clean-up program. Through the program, the company cleaned up a property previously used for lithium ore processing and constructed a new 80,000-square-foot (7,000 m²) office/warehouse building. This voluntary program offers "future liability protection". O January 7, 2014, a California Superior Court found that ConAgra and its co-defendants were liable in creating a public nuisance due to lead-based paint the companies sold. Ten local governments in California filed the suit and the court ordered Conagra, NL Industries and Sherwin-Williams to pay $1.15 billion to remove or abate the lead in homes located in those cities and counties. Although ConAgra never produced paint, it assumed the liabilities of W. P. Fuller & Co., a San Francisco-based paint producer, through a series of acquisitions. The disposition of The People v. ConAgra Grocery Products Company et al. in the California sixth Appellate District Court on November 14, 2017, is that

... the judgment is reversed, and the matter is remanded to the trial court with directions to (1) recalculate the amount of the abatement fund to limit it to the amount necessary to cover the cost of remediating pre-1951 homes, and (2) hold an evidentiary hearing regarding the appointment of a suitable receiver. The Plaintiff shall recover its costs on appeal.

New
During the 2000s and 2010s, ConAgra faced further scrutiny for its practices. It received low marks on environmental stewardship from Ceres and Newsweek, with the company ranking 342nd of 500 on the latter's inaugural "Green Rankings" list. In 2013, a California judge ordered ConAgra, along with Sherwin-Williams and NL Industries, to pay $1.1 billion for the renovation of homes in 10 California counties which had been painted with lead paint sold by the companies. ConAgra was named a defendant in the suit as it had assumed the liabilities of W.P. Fuller & Co. following a series of mergers; after multiple appeals, the company reached a settlement amount of $305 million in 2019.

Comparing the old text to the new side by side with the references looks like this:

Comparison
Conagra has been criticized for its lack of response to global climate change. During the 2000s and 2010s, ConAgra faced further scrutiny for its practices. A 2006 report by Ceres, a non-profit organization that works to address global climate change and other sustainability issues, entitled "Corporate Governance and Climate Change: Making the Connection", measures how 100 leading global companies are responding to global warming. Companies in the report were evaluated on a 0 to 100 scale. ConAgra scored a total of 4 points, the lowest of any of the food companies rated. In a 2009 ranking by Newsweek, ConAgra ranked 342nd out of U.S. 500 largest corporations in terms of overall environmental score. It received low marks on environmental stewardship from Ceres and Newsweek, with the company ranking 342nd of 500 on the latter's inaugural "Green Rankings" list.
In 2003–2004, ConAgra participated in a Minnesota Pollution Control Agency voluntary investigation and clean-up program. Through the program, the company cleaned up a property previously used for lithium ore processing and constructed a new 80,000-square-foot (7,000 m²) office/warehouse building. This voluntary program offers "future liability protection".
O January 7, 2014, a California Superior Court found that ConAgra and its co-defendants were liable in creating a public nuisance due to lead-based paint the companies sold. Ten local governments in California filed the suit and the court ordered Conagra, NL Industries and Sherwin-Williams to pay $1.15 billion to remove or abate the lead in homes located in those cities and counties. Although ConAgra never produced paint, it assumed the liabilities of W. P. Fuller & Co., a San Francisco-based paint producer, through a series of acquisitions. The disposition of The People v. ConAgra Grocery Products Company et al. in the California sixth Appellate District Court on November 14, 2017, is that

... the judgment is reversed, and the matter is remanded to the trial court with directions to (1) recalculate the amount of the abatement fund to limit it to the amount necessary to cover the cost of remediating pre-1951 homes, and (2) hold an evidentiary hearing regarding the appointment of a suitable receiver. The Plaintiff shall recover its costs on appeal.

In 2013, a California judge ordered ConAgra, along with Sherwin-Williams and NL Industries, to pay $1.1 billion for the renovation of homes in 10 California counties which had been painted with lead paint sold by the companies. ConAgra was named a defendant in the suit as it had assumed the liabilities of W.P. Fuller & Co. following a series of mergers; after multiple appeals, the company reached a settlement amount of $305 million in 2019.

References

Please let me know if that makes sense and what you think! RWConagra (talk) 21:24, 19 October 2023 (UTC)