Talk:Rich Energy

This page was proposed for deletion by Chris Ssk (talk · contribs) on 2 July 2019.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Companies Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Companies To-do: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes Maintain : Portal:Companies Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs Other : Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner Answer requests for comments Food and drink: Beverages Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Related taskforces: /  This article is within the scope of the Beverages Task Force, a task force which is currently considered to be inactive. Food and Drink task list: edit history watch purge To edit this page, select here Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink: Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish Participate in project-related deletion discussions. Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this. Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here . Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

Companies House has recorded this change of name. This leads me to ask two things: is CH a primary source, and should we keep the old name as that is the name it had when it was notorious? Britmax (talk) 08:20, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can see, Lightning Volt Ltd is only used for legal reasons. They appear to keep using Rich Energy commercially. So I would keep the article as is.Tvx1 14:40, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Companies House is a primary source, because the information they hold is filed by the people or entity concerned. That said, primary sources are fine to use within certain parameters - see

WP:PRIMARY for the details to save me essentially repeating them here. --kingboyk (talk) 00:38, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

However, it's not clear to me if this article is supposed to be about Rich Energy the drink, Rich Energy the brand or Rich Energy the company (which now might be Lightning Volt... at least in the UK?). Language like "claims to manufacture the Rich Energy energy drink" just don't sound encyclopedic. Perhaps this article should be deleted or reduced to a stub until someone can actually figure out what is going on with this 'company'. Sorry for the verbal diarrhoea. 2A02:A210:A1C2:9380:A0E7:8EAF:EEC8:2D53 (talk) 15:13, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I understand where this coming from, and think the article actually tells the story quite well, but it does perhaps give a slightly false impression that the drink is total "vapourware". Some units have certainly been manufactured, and some have been sold through Amazon; photos have appeared of purchases on social media. I'd not be surprised if there is a reliable source somewhere where an author goes into this (maybe even tried a can themselves) given the interest there was in the brand in the F1 media when the Haas deal collapsed. It might - shall we say - prove harder to reliably source from non-primary sources mass production, however. --kingboyk (talk) 00:45, 22 March 2020 (UTC) Maybe we should update "Area served : Worldwide" then. There's no evidence of the drink being available outside the United Kingdom. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 40.0.117.29 (talk) 10:30, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The "vapourware" thing is exactly the impression I took from the article. If that's not the case, it probably needs a bit of a re-write. Dohzer (talk) 13:57, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]