Talk:Pathmark

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

Fair use rationale for Image:Pathmark logo.png[edit]

Image:Pathmark logo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:09, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1999 Ahold proposal[edit]

Ahold would create four store names??!

It would have been bad to kill of Giant of the Washington, DC area. That store name carries a long history and goodwill.

Njbob (talk) 08:49, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New York-centric?[edit]

This article is rather New York-centric, it seems to me. Pathmark operates as well in Pennsylvania, S. Jersey, and Delaware, but from most of this article, you would have no idea. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.175.88.149 (talk) 15:36, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Pathmark. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:34, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pathmark. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 11:11, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pathmark stores in ny[edit]

I worked for pathmark at the store in west islip ny from 1976 to 1980...we did not get computer registers until 1979..not 1974 like it says in the article. Reginakirby (talk) 02:22, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Possible copy-paste[edit]

I tagged this article as a possible copy-paste of [1]. I couldn't positively flag it as a copyvio, but the History section which was added in 2007 looks suspicious and lacks inline refs. It's worth noting that if this is a reverse copyvio, Ref for Business chose to copy only the sections which were added in the April 2007 edit and not the existing "2000s" section. –dlthewave ☎ 19:17, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, the oldest version of the Reference for Business article I could find in the Wayback machine was one from February 13, 2010, and some stuff in that copy is similar to stuff from a December 2009 version of this article.
On the other hand, the Reference for Business page for F. Duane Ackerman appears to have a lot more material than I could find in at least some versions of his Wikipedia page, so it would appear that Reference for Business isn't just another one of those Wikipedia-scraping sites. That article has, according to the Wayback Machine, been on Reference for Business at least as far back as this version from December 2005. Guy Harris (talk) 20:25, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've found a few confirmed examples of material copied from Reference for Business, but never the other way around. It's especially telling that it was added to Wikipedia in a single edit with no sources. There seems to be enough circumstantial evidence to justify removal. –dlthewave ☎ 20:42, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bad Grammar[edit]

This articles contains poor grammar, especially in the InfoBox.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pathmark&oldid=1208197587"