Talk:Copenhagen (tobacco)

message: This article contained much misinformation about specific brand names, packaging, and release of certain products. I have taken the time to fix this. The majority of Copenhagen, apart from Original flavor, comes in plastic cans with metal lids. The "Cope" line of products was listed as "Copenhagen" when they are very different products. (Cope Long Cut Straight vs. Copenhagen Long Cut Straight for example, are two very different products.) It was also listed that Copenhagen Mint was never released, but as of 2013, it has been released in certain areas.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.174.73.6 (talk) 20:07, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: This is incorrect 72.179.161.146 (talk) 20:48, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Most of the Copenhagen Tins are plastic with metal lids. Copenhagen is the premium brand with Skoal being #2. The discount lines are Red Seal and Husky. 2600:1700:4D44:820:99C0:C33C:36EA:9DA9 (talk) 20:59, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

text: It's also substantially similar to the Skoal tobacco article. -- Mikeblas 17:04, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

message: It is a page about a product that can be purchased. How does that make it read like an advertisement? If you read any article about something you can purchase, you will find the same style of article...see Pepsi for example, with a list of celebrity endorsments, past slogans, and even individual flavors of the soft drink. You will likely find this on most other pages...so, how does this article deserve the banner on neutrality? 
:i wrote the above statement months ago, just thought i'd sign it now... Jlricherson 01:54, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reads like and advertisement? 

message: "This product is not available in the city of Copenhagen, mainly because Danes don't use dipping tobacco."
It's an unsourced statement and makes me uneasy so i'm just going to take the line out, if you find a source that says there is no such a thing as a Dane who doesnt dip, gladly put the line back in.
Well it's true that the product is not available in Copenhagen, and snuff isn't that popular here, partly because it's illegal to sell snuff in portions. You may only sell it in loose powder form.
The article could use some connection to the city of Copenhagen.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.38.121.26 (talk) 08:17, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dane's dont dip? 

message: we like to lip our cope in hsv alabama and straight pipe our trucks —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.157.17.19 (talk) 14:19, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  copenhagen 

message: There has never been a "wintergreen" or "green apple" variety of copenhagen and this is made even more unfounded with the statement "To better compete with skoal" They are the same company, U.S. Tobacco Incorporated, and therefore have no need to compete in the first place.
:more false information, the can says "U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Co." Just thought i'd correct this campaign of falsehoods against Copenhagen. also, the article says that the brand name will be changing to "cope" . is it the brand name, or will it only be for the two new varieties? does the article need to be retitled? Jlricherson 01:54, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Completely false information 

message: Might want to remove this claim. Oliver Twist of Odense, Denmark, has been making pellets for "dipping" since 1805. 
--Gogobah 06:33, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oliver Twist, which I have a package of right here, is not a "dipping" tobacco but is rather a "chewing tobacco"...might be that I'm splitting hairs, but it is true.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.81.36.178 (talk) 19:02, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Claims of world's oldest dipping tobacco?

message: I got rid of this line:
"While Copenhagen Short is preferable to most chewers, the fine cut that allows for greater chewing pleasure can sometimes get caught in an unsuspecting chewers gum line."
I suppose it's true that it gets caught in the gums, but that doesn't belong in an encyclopedia.  Plus, the "most chewers" part is dubious and unsourced.  If anyone disagrees, put it back in with a citation. --BennyD (talk) 04:37, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Line in the History section 

message: This reads like an advertisement, and probably shouldn't. TallNapoleon (talk) 06:36, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Appeal

message: It really needs a cleanup. It reads like a ad.--Villa88 (talk) 06:59, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup