Talk:Lemon & Paeroa

Untitled

L& P is not uncoloured!!!!!!. By my last check it was a browny yellow colour :-)

I'm not sure the statements about L&P's availability are entirely accurate. For some reason I managed to get one out of a Coffs Harbour Base hospital cold drinks machine in mid 2007. Perhaps it's becoming more widely available. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.100.201.159 (talk) 15:00, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Dubious statement

The statement The paradoxical advertising slogan "World famous in New Zealand" has become a popular New Zealand saying meaning very well known locally, but not receiving the recognition it deserves overseas is very dubious and, unless a reference can be provided, which i doubt it can, this statement has no founding and must be removed. Taifarious1 06:24, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

I find this is exactly what the phase is used for, often in response to a FOB Kiwi's surprise that their favourite brand is not available in the rest of the world. As in "I think you might find that Watties tomato sauce / Hokey Pokey icecream / K-bars are 'World famous in New Zealand' mate!" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.32.215.11 (talk) 10:28, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Availability

L&P is actually available in quite a number of supermarkets, convenience stores, and petrol/service stations - not just in NZ speciality stores. Someone should amend this part of the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.108.205.95 (talk) 06:00, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

I disagree with the interpretation of the author re 'world famous in NZ'. Recommend that a marketing-related source of the phrase be found which clearly explains the meaning with respect to L&P.195.75.244.91 (talk) 12:04, 10 October 2008 (UTC)Brian

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging

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)

Ingredients

L&P is definitely not just lemon and fizzy mineral water, it doesn't taste like lemonade. So there must be another ingredient, which I think Coca Cola claims is "secret". I don't know if anyone else has an idea, but my personal theory is that it's manuka extract (I have searched google and can't find any debate about it). If you've made fresh manuka tea (with sugar though), there's definitely something reminiscent about the taste. Re: the debate on "world famous in New Zealand", I agree with the article, that's my understanding of the phrase - I certainly can't see how it's "very dubious". I'd be interested in hearing suggestions on what else it might mean though. Miasmic (talk) 23:24, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Tastes like Mt. Dew to me. The Diet version tastes like nothing i've had before, Not really good, more like fizzy water. --Saranis1 (talk) 04:36, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

It has a vague sasparila-like aftertaste. Plasmic Physics (talk) 05:20, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Merge proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of the discussion was not merged. (non-admin closure) Edward-Woodrow • talk 18:27, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

---

I propose merging World famous in New Zealand into Lemon & Paeroa. Article doesn't demonstrate that it has a widespread enough usage outside of L&P marketing to have its own article. This article also has a bit of a dubious claim, "'World famous in New Zealand' has become a popular New Zealand saying" (which is unsourced). I've lived in New Zealand my entire life and have never heard someone use this phrase. Panamitsu (talk) ^{Please ping on reply}

• Oppose. @Panamitsu: The phrase has gone well beyond its L&P origins and is widely used here in New Zealand. I'm surprised that you've never heard it. It's been used, for example, as the title of a book about New Zealand business successes, as a compilation album of New Zealand rock bands, and as the https://www.imdb.com/title/tt4963514/ title of an episode of a TV show], as well as being used by the media (and again), businesses, and lopcal government, as well as other food and drink (see para 3). Many New Zealanders know the phrase but don't realise its original connection to L&P, so merging is not the best option for that reason, either. Grutness...wha? 03:36, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose. @Panamitsu: When I lived in New Zealand I heard locals use the "World Famous in New Zealand" phrase, sometimes in relation to L&P but to other topics as well. --Roisterer (talk) 04:32, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
• Support: The article is so small that it can easily be a sectin of the L&P article. --Spekkios (talk) 21:31, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose. @Panamitsu: I have heard the expression "World famous in New Zealand" being used in variety of contexts, and the evidence presented by Grutness backs this up. The separate article is worth keeping.Marshelec (talk) 23:35, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose. @Panamitsu: I support reasons given above by Grutness and Marshelec. I've added titles of books using the phrase to the article. --Gertrude206 (talk) 23:29, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

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.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Lemon & Paeroa/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Rjjiii (talk · contribs) 09:24, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

In the next week or so, I will look over the article. Before I start, I notice there are 6 inline cleanup tags (2 when and 4 citation needed]. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ(talk) 09:24, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Well-written

I find issues with the prose throughout the article. I'm going to note some examples below, but this isn't exhaustive. I'll put the article on hold if you want to try a copyedit. It may be a better idea to ask another editor for a copyedit of the article or to step away for a couple of weeks and come back with fresh eyes. Here are several examples:

• "No one had thought of commercialising it." This confuses me because I don't know what time frame it's talking about, why people thought (or did not think) that, and how it could be true when it's immediately followed by the history of commercialization. The sources mention (a) specifically when the water was sold as "table water", (b) that individuals were bottling it for themselves, and (c) that at least some people did not think there was a market for it at one point.
• "This factory sold water rather than Lemon & Paeroa, which was known as "Paeroa and Lemon" at the time—it is not clear when "Paeroa and Lemon" switched to "Lemon and Paeroa", it was marketed using both names in the late 1940s." I think the information presented here is straightforward, but this sentence structure is very complex, beyond the college graduate reading level. It was not clear to me that two products were being sold until I read the source. I also don't know if the P&L to L&P name change needs to be mentioned if we can't say anything about it.
• "It was 1934 when Lemon & Paeroa started being manufactured in Paeroa rather than Auckland." At this point in the article, it has been said that some type of water was shipped from Paeroa to Auckland. Since no mention was made of Lemon and Paeroa being made in Auckland, or the distinction between the mineral water and L&P, it was really unclear what this sentence meant.
• "At some point there was a pipe that went from the factory to the Railway Reserve which allowed the public to drink the water using a hand pump." After doing a quick search, a journal article says that was run in 1970.
• In the history section, the events are out of chronological order. Some parts were difficult for me to follow because of this. In one stretch the time periods run as follows
  • 1970s
  • At some point
  • 1969
  • By the 1970s
  • in 1904
  • not known when
  • estimated 1907
  • in 1980
  • In 1995
• "In 2019 a 70cm tall L&P bottle was sold on Trade Me for over $1,000." This sentence itself is very straightforward. I think the significance though is about how L&P is a part of New Zealand culture or something to that effect. As written, it comes at the end of a paragraph about Coca-Cola potentially changing the bottle color, which made it initially seem like this was somehow connected to that color change.
• "In October 2016 Lemon & Paeroa launched a limited edition" I don't see how this section is organized. The first two paragraphs start with a date but run out of chronological order. I see (a) a paragraph's worth of material about chocolate promoted with a fake car crash, (b) information about flavors spread across both paragraphs, and (c) a sentence about the L&P Cafe.
• "it became a traffic hazard." This was a really fascinating part of the article for me. I would consider expanding and clarifying the chain of events. I'm not from New Zealand, so it was unclear to me until I read the sources. Highway 2 runs through Paeroa, but I didn't know this. My incorrect interpretation of the wiki text was that the bottle had been set up in the town, then dismantled, then rebuilt on Highway 2, and then moved to another location that sounds rural and unrelated to Highway 2. I think that misreading is easy for someone unfamiliar with the area.
• "In 2020 it was listed for sale." Coming at the end of the paragraph, I thought this was the most recent information, that the place was currently up for sale. But reference 15 is a review of the place from 2 years later. Do we know who bought it? Is it up for sale but still running as usual?
• "In 2009 Tony Coombe tried to object Coca-Cola Amatil's attempt to trademark the phrase in 2004." Somehow the article should make the connection and conflict between Tony Coombe/L&P Cafe vs. Coca-Cola/L&P beverage clearer.

I'll stop there for the prose. I hope that doesn't come off as too harsh, and you are welcome to ask questions.Rjjⁱⁱⁱ(talk) 10:52, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Improved but some issues remain, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 19:07, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Verifiable with no original research

2a: This looks good. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ(talk) 06:39, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Source review:[1]

• Reference 2: This is a reliable source. The citation is formatted as a URL but the URL is a mirror of an article published in the "Ohinemuri Regional History Journal" issue 45 in September 2001, so this close to ideal for the topic.
  • Some close paraphrasing here: Compare "in a cow paddock near the confluence of the Ohinemuri and Waihou Rivers, known as The Junction," to "in a cow paddock near the junction between the Ohinemuri and Waihou Rivers, known as The Junction at the time."
  • Otherwise this verifies the inforation in the article and the rest is appropriately summarized.
• Reference 3: This article by "By Graham Watton, Curator and Historian of the Paeroa and District Museum" is mostly a word-for-word reprint of the journal article but has slightly more specific information about ownership. It verifies the material.
• Reference 6: This is the product's official website. The reliable sources cited earlier in the article, and the wiki text cited to them directly contradict the idea that in 1907 "Menzies & Co started bottling the water" so it should be made more clear that this is the manufacturer's story, and not a fact.
• Reference 9: This newspaper article verifies the content.
• Reference 10: This site is somewhat promotional rather than pure news. It's used only to cite a hard fact and an attributed viewpoint which is an acceptable use. It verifies the content in the article.
• Reference 13: This news radio interview with the mayor and brief article verify all but the "the change would have difficulty gathering widespread support." Consider rephrasing this to better match the source.
• Reference 19: This verifies the content. Since the article cites a few experts, you could revise "a few people" to instead mention an expert or two and summarize their input.
• Reference 20: This historical encyclopedia maintained by the national government verifies the content.
• Reference 27: This news article verifies the material.
• Reference 28: This self-published source is from a subject matter expert and verifies the content.

The sources mostly look good, Panamitsu. Take a look at the comments for reference 2, 6, and 13.Rjjⁱⁱⁱ(talk) 10:42, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Resolved. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 19:06, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Broad in its coverage

• Have you read this article: https://www.ohinemuri.org.nz/journals/journal-36-september-1992/paeroa-mineral-spring ? It's a solid source for the first paragraph in your history section.
• Also this 1970 source is worse in every way than reference 2, except that it explicity gives 1970 as the date for "there was a pipe that went from the factory to the Railway Reserve": https://www.ohinemuri.org.nz/journals/journal-14-october-1970/history-of-lemon-and-paeroa
• There is some kind of conflict between L&P Cafe and Coca-Cola that forced the cafe to rebrand. Somehow the article should touch on this if it's mentioning the Cafe and Coombe's trademark dispute.
• I would love a slight expansion on the bottle. It's amazing that they just had this massive thing on the street. Also, do any sources explain how and why people climbed inside of it to promote L&P?Rjjⁱⁱⁱ(talk) 10:52, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

  Improved but some issues remain, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 19:06, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Neutral

This criteria is affected by issues with prose, the broadness, and a minor issue with a reference. The overall structure meets NPOV otherwise. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ(talk) 10:52, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

I've marked this as met, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 19:07, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Stable

The only potential stability issue is the merge discussion, but it appears to have reached a consensus not to merge the two articles.Rjjⁱⁱⁱ(talk) 10:52, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Illustrated

6a: All images have valid copyright information and licenses. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ(talk) 06:39, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

6b: Check your captions out. 2 of the 3 end with a period, but none are complete sentences. You could make them into sentences or (likely the better option) just remove the periods. Also "A bottle of L&P." is not a very helpful caption. What makes this photo helpful for a reader? Why is this slightly different design from the infobox photo included here? The caption should signal that. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ(talk) 06:39, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Overall

1. Well-written
2. Verifiable with no original research
3. Broad in its coverage
4. Neutral
5. Stable
6. Illustrated

Comments

Update: I checked out the images and the reference section. Let me know when you've addressed the existing cleanup tags and I'll move on to checking sources. Regards, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ(talk) 06:39, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

@Rjjiii: I've now resolved the inline tags and the captions. —Panamitsu (talk) ^{Please ping on reply} 07:59, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

@Panamitsu: The captions look good. I'm marking this section as passed. Also, the giant bottle is fine as it is, so this is outside of GA concerns: have you seen this big bottle photo on the commons File:Big Lemon and Paeroa Bottle.jpg, I find it more clear but that's entirely up to you. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ(talk) 10:38, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

@Panamitsu: The article looks better in many ways. I don't think it meets the GA criteria yet and will soon conclude my review. You are welcome to renominate the article at any time. You are also welcome to ask any questions either to me or at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations.

A few closing notes regarding this version of the article: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lemon_%26_Paeroa&oldid=1177901394

The captions are clearer, the added image helps with clarity in the history, and it has a valid copyright template on the commons. I think some of the potential NPOV and source issues were due to ambiguity in the prose, so I've marked both criteria as a pass. The prose is clearer, but I still find the prose confusing in many places. The largest issue I see with criteria 3 (Broad in its coverage), is that the article mentions but does not explain the relationships between the L&P Cafe, the L&P brand's owner, and Tony Coombe. I think the opening line in the history section combined with the added image provide a better framework to understand that content. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 19:51, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

@Rjjiii Well thank you for choosing to review an article that was obviously very far from GA status! It helps a lot. —Panamitsu (talk) 20:24, 30 September 2023 (UTC)