Jump to content

Talk:Tops Friendly Markets

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


Bankruptcy filing February 2018

[edit]

http://www.supermarketnews.com/news/tops-files-bankruptcy?NL=SN-09&Issue=SN-09_20180221_SN-09_459&sfvc4enews=42&cl=article_1&utm_rid=CPG06000001220596&utm_campaign=21790&utm_medium=email&elq2=bf156555c295478db7d2ca47b583df3d 73.8.5.220 (talk) 15:51, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Tops Logo.jpg

[edit]

Image:Tops Logo.jpg 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 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 04:36, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Former Martins Locations

[edit]

The Martins in Dunkirk is now a Tops, though I don't remember when they switched over, so I wasn't sure how to mention it in the article. I've heard that all the Martins are becoming Tops, but since I don't live near any of the others, I don't know for sure. --user.lain (talk) 02:44, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Logo originally a spinning top?

[edit]

I don't see any evidence of this on the web, and the assertion is not backed up by a cite. Very early photos of TOPS stores show the letters T O P S each contained within a diamond, on a background of offset diamonds, which makes more sense with the current stylized collapsed diamond design.[1] Ronhenryithaca (talk) 20:36, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I recall seeing a really older one (north of Lockport) in which the diamond was a spinning top. But you're right, it's not sourced, so it should go. Daniel Case (talk) 22:03, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://tops.graphics.grocerywebsite.com/G_Departments/Bottom_Image.jpg
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Tops Friendly Markets. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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 10:05, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Tops Friendly Markets. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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 23:42, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Tops Friendly Markets. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 08:48, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Buffalo edit war

[edit]

@Sideswipe9th, Love of Corey, Polycarpa aurata, and AdrianWikiEditor: Please stop edit-warring and instead discuss here. Thank you. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 23:13, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

More than happy to. The content that is repeatedly being added is not due for inclusion as it is only tangentially related to the supermarket chain as a whole. While the shooting did occur in a branch of the supermarket, it was only within a single branch. The effect on the chain as a whole is minimal. Unless this shooting somehow effects the business as a whole, rather than a single store location, I do not think it is relevant to include here.
On the whole, as this disruption is happening on one other article at present, I don't think we need to glorify mass shooters in this way. While the shooting itself was a notable enough event to warrant its own article, information relating to that shooting does not need to be haphazardly placed in multiple related articles. Sideswipe9th (talk) 23:21, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Aye, aye, Captain! Polycarpa aurata (talk) 03:22, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
King Soopers, anyone? This terrorist attack, the deadliest in New York state since 9/11, will be tied to the brand for the rest of its existence now. Love of Corey (talk) 04:45, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for pointing that out. I have fixed it. Polycarpa aurata (talk) 05:20, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sigh. Love of Corey (talk) 01:31, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Gonna agree here with Sideswipe9th here for not mentioning the shooting on the main article for Tops. Another example of this precedent would be the October 2021 sexual assault on SEPTA train having its own page, but it wasn't mentioned on the main page for SEPTA as it was not caused by any employee of SEPTA, though its security force responded swiftly to it. The same applies here as the shooter was not affiliated with Tops. WuTang94 (talk) 05:22, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Past practice here is certainly on the side of not mentioning single-store incidents in articles about the chains. We don't mention the 2019 El Paso shooting in our article about Walmart, for instance. Nor is there a place for the 1984 San Ysidro shootings in the McDonald's article.

Most on point, the article on Luby's doesn't mention the Luby's shooting, and in that case we are talking about another chain with a very regional focus, entirely in one state, just as Tops is largely in New York with a few stores still in Pennsylvania and (now) Vermont. So if we're not mentioning that in the company article, I don't see why we'd need to mention this shooting here, either. Daniel Case (talk) 06:28, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Incidents in which several people were killed are important enough to include on articles such as this one; they're significant events for the company. The McDonald's & Walmart shootings are included on their companies' templates. Why do you say that Luby's doesn't mention the shooting there? Jim Michael 2 (talk) 11:03, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For the McDonald's article, a mention in a collapsed by default category, that doesn't appear at all for mobile editors is not the same as including a paragraph in the article text. The effect on the company, outside of that one store, was minimal.
As for Walmart, while the El Paso mass shooting is mentioned, it is only done so in a way that is contextually relevant to the article. In the first mention it is used as a framing device for why Walmart stopped selling handgun ammunition in all stores, as well as handguns in Alaska. In the second mention, it is as a single sentence in a much broader subsection about crime affecting the chain as a whole.
Luby's is another outlier here, and the same arguments against inclusion of a single location mass shooting that I'm making here I would also make there. Actually having reviewed the text and sources there, I would go further in my argument. The shooting at the store was in 1991. The store didn't close until 2020; 29 years later. A single CNN source, while reliable, does not demonstrate to me an association between the events of the shooting at the closing of the store nearly three decades later. I would require several more sources to establish fully that link before considering it due for inclusion.
I would remind everyone that balance requires us not to give disproportionate significance to otherwise minor aspects of a subject. While we require reliable sources for everything we state on Wiki, we do not need to state everything a reliable source says when the relevance is tangential or minor at best. In the case of Tops, Walmart, McDonald's, and Luby's while their respective shootings were major to the individual store, they were minor to the chain as a whole. Sideswipe9th (talk) 14:05, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The Killeen Luby's closed in 2000, not 2020, so not 29 years later. That location was closed until 1992, and while they kept it going, it struggled. They even tried remodeling it, spending $350,000, to change it so it no longer appeared to be the same as when the shooting happened. Also, the Luby's article did formerly link to the article on the shooting.
One difference between the El Paso shooting vs the Luby's shooting is that the El Paso shooting was never referred to as the "Walmart shooting", while the shooting in Killeen was generally always referred to as the Luby's Shooting (and that is even the name of the article about the subject). Walmart Shooting in fact just gives references to 4 separate shootings that took place at a Walmart. Hellmark (talk) 17:43, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You are referring to Walmart shootings list. Cwater1 (talk) 21:57, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So does this mean that the 2021 San Jose shooting shouldn’t be included on the page for the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority? If so then I will fix it immediately. Somewhereattheendofspace (talk) 07:27, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@X-Editor: You should read this discussion. I'd revert your edit myself, but I can't because of the protection level. Polycarpa aurata (talk) 19:48, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Daniel Case (talk) 19:53, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I made a mistake back in July by not reading the discussion. Cwater1 (talk) 14:25, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In the article, Columbiana Centre, it mentions a shooting and the incident has its own article. The Mayfair Mall has something similar. Should the mentionings in the main article be removed? Popeyes doesn't mention the 1994 Popeyes murders in the main article. Waffle House no longer mention the incidents in the main article. I was reading though the articles on Tuesday. I am keeping this topic in mind for future edits. I see why it's important to look at talk pages and article's revision history.Cwater1 (talk) 04:12, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tops_Friendly_Markets&oldid=1234738317"