Talk:Retired Ben & Jerry's flavors
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Never released flavors
Two flavors were added to this list today, with a year of "never." Chunk has explained to me on his talk page that the flavors were developed but not released. If they were never released, then they could never have been retired, since retiring a flavor seems to indicate that it was once available, but not anymore. They're not listed on the company's "Flavor Graveyard" page, and there is no indication that they ever existed. Is there any good reason as to why the flavors should exist? They're about as unverifiable as it gets. — HelloAnnyong [ t · c ] 20:59, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, i found something. This article about a flavor contest mentions the flavors that were added, and remarks that their "fates were debatable from the get-go. Or in other words... don't go there!" That seems to indicate that although they may have been made, but didn't make it past that first stage. Just because a company tests something doesn't mean that it should be listed here. Compare this to an article on, say, Tyco, the toy building company. In a list of the company's products, should one list all of the products ever developed, regardless of whether or not they made it to store shelves? The answer is probably no. — HelloAnnyong [ t · c ] 21:03, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- They killed the flavors in the test kitchen or after local distribution. In other words they created the flavors after research and development, gave them a name, and then after more trial runs determined that the flavor would not work on a mass scale. This does not mean the flavor only existed in the flavor creator's imagination or no one outside the company ever tasted it. This page will continue to move at a snails pace if I have to keep explaining myself to you after every edit. Why dont you pick on the Haagen Dazs page for once? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chunk Champion (talk • contribs) 21:38, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- If you think I'm just picking on you, then I apologize, but that's not my intention at all. I'm trying to incorporate your wealth of knowledge into an acceptable Wiki article, and to maintain the article's integrity. As to the issue at hand: it's irrelevant where the flavor was killed, so long as it was killed before it was mass produced and shipped to stores. You didn't respond to my example with Tyco. If you'd like, we can (once again) walk down the avenues of getting a third opinion on this. — HelloAnnyong [ t · c ] 21:46, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- I dont care what your wiki-friends have to say on a subject they know nothing about. The press release you dug up clearly shows they were flavors so Im putting them on the page.--Chunk Champion 21:59, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- If you think I'm just picking on you, then I apologize, but that's not my intention at all. I'm trying to incorporate your wealth of knowledge into an acceptable Wiki article, and to maintain the article's integrity. As to the issue at hand: it's irrelevant where the flavor was killed, so long as it was killed before it was mass produced and shipped to stores. You didn't respond to my example with Tyco. If you'd like, we can (once again) walk down the avenues of getting a third opinion on this. — HelloAnnyong [ t · c ] 21:46, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- They killed the flavors in the test kitchen or after local distribution. In other words they created the flavors after research and development, gave them a name, and then after more trial runs determined that the flavor would not work on a mass scale. This does not mean the flavor only existed in the flavor creator's imagination or no one outside the company ever tasted it. This page will continue to move at a snails pace if I have to keep explaining myself to you after every edit. Why dont you pick on the Haagen Dazs page for once? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chunk Champion (talk • contribs) 21:38, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Merge?
Should we merge this into Ben & Jerry's flavors? It doesn't seem like it needs a seperate article.JIMfoamy1 (talk) 02:17, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- We've been down this road before. When combined, the articles are enormous. Having them split is a better solution. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 02:20, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
