Talk:Foam food container

message: This item is massively prevalent in North America. Can we please use the English name for the title? Badagnani 17:49, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes this article should get more internationalized preferably with an official English name. Lunch box, food box, takeout box? The oyster pail is synonymous with Chinese food in the US just as much as this box is synonymous with food in the east.  Benjwong 04:36, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Well in the US, every restaurant has a little different box.  But it is quite standardised in HK. "styrofoam takeout container" is what I would personally use too.  But come to think of it, few people would say "oyster pail" either.  "Fann hap" is more of a romanization temporary name if anything. This page can move anytime.  Benjwong 04:44, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

text: If styrofoam takeout container is what we need to get internationalized, is at least a start. The material is right on.  Benjwong 04:54, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Maybe we need a new category like "container" including strofoam box/cup/candy box/lunchbox articles etc.  These are used by millions of people.  Benjwong 13:22, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: English name

message: Good job on this article, Benjwong. Badagnani 19:36, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Good article

message: Styrofoam is a Trademark name for building insulation (usually blue, I think) made by the Dow Chemical company.  The material that makes up these containsers is Extruded polystyrene foam (XPS) or simply just "foam" for short.  It'd suggest the new article name be ""Foam takeout container".  Your thoughts?  If there's no disagreement I'll make the move in the near future.Plhofmei (talk) 22:09, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: "Foam takeout container" is not the most commonly used name in English. It's "styrofoam takeout container." Badagnani (talk) 15:54, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article needs to be renamed 

message: This article is overdue for a serious revision. Badagnani, if you're reading this, then please STOP THE REVERTS. There is nothing substantially useful or important about the sentence "They may also be embossed". Again, I am only going to continue the revising and I would like you all to help. Eugene2x-talk 19:40, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Kindly do not use all capital letters. When adding to an article, please be very careful to not remove (blank) earlier text and links that were carefully selected to produce the most encyclopedic article possible. Hyperaggressive and insistent blanking does not enhance this article, nor your reputation at WP. Badagnani (talk) 19:48, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Enough with that nonsense. Either you compromise and we work out a solution, or I'm reporting you for edit warring on the noticeboard. Eugene2x-talk 00:44, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

text: User:Ronz, please see WP:STALK. Badagnani (talk) 03:28, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Flickr is technically not a source.  However where are you going to find that much references for a lunch box, really? Benjwong (talk) 03:30, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Regarding Badagnani's to see WP:STALK.  As usual, if you're unable to follow WP:TALK, WP:DR, and WP:CIVIL don't be surprised if your comments and actions are ignored, and editors continue to work in good faith with those who are. --Ronz (talk) 22:00, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article problems 

message: Can we try to get a few more introduced? Also is treehugger.com a RS? TIA --Tom 14:27, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources

message: See . Badagnani (talk) 16:57, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Most was non sourced original research. Only thing cited was from http://www.grinningplanet.com/2005/11-01/styrofoam-cups-article.htm Is this appropriate? Tom 17:09, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  Without reliable sources, WP:V states that unverified material can be removed.  If anyone wants to restore any of it, please provide proper sources per WP:V. --Ronz (talk) 19:52, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

text: No insult intended, but it looks like a bunch of photos and an answer.com page used as citations? Using a photo as a citation smacks of original research, imho. Anyways, why not add links/material here and then discuss. The article could still use help so I will see if I can find any/more citations, ect. Thank you, --Tom 20:58, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. At the very least they should have been made into a references section (which I did), but it's probably better to get rid of all the photos (half of which were dead links anyway). Eugene2x-talk 22:03, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

text: Badagnani, I find your tone and manner very insulting. Calling me hyper-aggressive for removing inappropriate Flickr links and a questionable source, along with forcing me to "show good faith" when you don't is hardly conforming to WP:CIVIL. I think you need some time to rethink what you said. Being overprotective of your content is not necessarily good for the project, and it usually does more harm than good (especially when you revert with the same edit summary about "blanking" and everything was chosen to be "as encyclopedic as possible".Eugene2x-talk 23:27, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: In addition, many of your edits are questionable. A lot are just unsubstantiated reverts such as this and this. But enough of this talk, let's get back to the subject instead of behaving rather uncivilly. Eugene2x-talk 04:10, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

text: Maybe we should try to get others involved in improving this article or post the "material" and links here for discussion? Tom 04:19, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

text: I've readded the health issues section and revised it a bit by adding arguments on both sides (crude as it might be), as it's a pretty controversial subject. Eugene2x-talk 04:52, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Massive deletions 

message: Hello to both of you. I am your mail-order mediator for this case. I request that both of you come to the mediation page to state your side of the story, plain and true. I try to read this talk and it is circular and unclear. Please come to this page so we may have a clear and mature discussion about this. --NewSinew (talk) 15:20, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Mediator