Talk:Ribena

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is supported by the Soft Drinks WikiProject, a group dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to all non-alcoholic beverages. Please participate by editing the article, and help us improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.

In terms of history, I think that the fact that Ribena was the first drink in a carton, and 'Ribena claims that 95% all UK and Irish blackcurrants are used in their drinks.' should probably be in there somewhere, but I'd have no idea where to put it.

One way not to put it in is "== Really!== About 95% of ALL yes thats ALL UK and Irish blackcurrants end up in your ribena." --Henrygb 03:31, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

Is this definitely the claim they were making? The advert where it in was gramatically ambiguous ("95% of all Britain's blackcurrants make it" IIRC) and could be interpreted in all sorts of ways --87.82.24.11 20:55, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps we need more discussion on their claims in the media. Note this story about their Vitamin C claims in New Zealand... 210.55.130.65 22:03, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Controversy vs false claims

A controversy is something that is disputed. GSK have been convicted of misleading consumers in two countries - they are guilty of a false claim. --60.234.231.99 10:08, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

To quote the New Zealand Herald editorial 'Thanks to the diligence of the two Pakuranga College pupils, the world's second-largest food and pharmaceutical manufacturer has been brought to its knees here and in Australia, where it has owned up to the Ribena deception."--60.234.231.99 10:19, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

GSK did not actually make a false claim. The quote was, "the blackcurrants in Ribena contain four times the Vitamin C of oranges". That is quite correct. It is, however, misleading as it implies the Ribena itself has four times the Vitamin C of oranges and that is what they were fined for. TallGuy 03:06, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

That was the misleading claim which relates to the syrup. GSK also claimed the presence of Vitamin C on nutritional labels on 'Ready to Drink Ribena', which is promoted as a children's drink suitable for school lunches. Analysis showed no Vitamin C -so this was a false claim. GSK blamed their testing methods for the discrepancy but did not reveal why two fourteen year olds using school laboratory equipment could correctly analyse Vitamin C in the drink while the world's second largest food and pharmaceutical company could not.

From the Age "It agreed that its cartoned ready to drink Ribena, which it claimed had 7mg of vitamin C per 100ml, in fact had no detectable vitamin C content." Ribena maker fined $192,000 --60.234.231.99 04:27, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Good points, so there are misleading claims in advertising and false claims in Vitamin C content on the ready to drink range. --Zven 21:19, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Ribena (logo).PNG

Image:Ribena (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 05:15, 6 June 2007 (UTC)