Talk:Consumers Distributing

message: I'm a collector of Consumers Distributing catalogues going back to 1960. I hope to be able to make some major cleanups to this page soon, using those catalogues as references. What I don't have though is references on anything to do with the founding of the company in 1957. Anybody have some good references on this? --guru (talk) 21:31, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major update pending 

message: was nicknamed CARS (Consumers Automated Retail System), it was actually a great POS system in its time.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.240.18.204 (talk) 03:26, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consumers POS System 

message: I removed it because it is unencyclopedic in both tone and content. Wikipedia is not a directory (WP:DIRECTORY), even for a defunct chain. --oknazevad (talk) 05:40, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Store locations list. 

message: Needs at least SOME reference in this article...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.240.76.83 (talk) 15:03, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  407122 

message: An unreigistered editor has been adding in a claim that Consumers is being revived. The edits use boldface and italcis to provide undue emphasis, use Non-neutral language that reads like promotional material rather than an encyclopedia (it refers to the alleged new CEO as being "legendary"), provides no referenes to reliable sources, and includes a link to a dead website. I googled this, and found a Facebook page making the same claims, and stating that there would be a news release announcement in August 2011. But there is no evidence oin the web that this happened. Anyone can make a Facebook page. It isn't credible. Ground Zero | t 14:22, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Now there's one. Just throwing that in. consumersdistributing.ca TheAlexOfEvil (talk) 02:21, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not clear to me that this is actually the same company, as opposed to a former employee who has taken over a defunct name (or close approximation of the name). In any case, it only operated for a few months, apparently didn't provide the merchandise in some (possibly any?) cases) and is now in danger of being deregistered by Corporations Canada for failing to file its last two corporate returns. If this no tthe same company then it should either not be mentioned at all, or we should be very clear that it is not the same company. Meters (talk) 20:31, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Revival

message: I've removed several attempts to link to YouTube videos of ads. These are presumably copyrighted, and per WP:YOUTUBE we should not link to them or cite them. Meters (talk) 20:33, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  YouTube videos 

message: The logo should be replaced by the png version: :File:Consumers Distributing logo.png, most resolution logos commonly used on Wikipedia.--Choix de DAC (talk) 17:49, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Done Danski454 (talk) 18:21, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 21 August 2018 

message: The file :File:Consumers Distributing logo.jpg reflecting more the real last logo of the company, so it should be insert in logo line in infobox. A SVG version of this file should be created, so after it will probably stop to have the previous logo of a supposedly promotional user. If someone is able to create the logo of 1993 (:File:Consumers Distributing logo.jpg) in SVG format, it should be created we hope. 69.174.249.78 (talk) 18:34, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: sockpuppet/UPE request. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:52, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 1 September 2018 

message: I've just mass-reverted a long series of edits that were added by confirmed CDo sockpuppets, which again quietly removed the sourced section on Marc King's attempted relaunch of the brand, which has been one of the apparent goals of this sockfarm. There's been no actual good-faith discussion on whether or not it should be included, so I have restored it per WP:BANREVERT. I reviewed the edits that others had made in that time and I see only corrections to the links to files that the socks uploaded (which were deleted) so I've made no further changes.
The only exception is the listing of company headquarters in the infobox.  I see you have removed the New Jersey headquarters several times, and from my memory it's been in the article for a while, so I investigated. The claim was added when a CDo sockpuppet added the infobox in this series of edits, and there has never been a source. Probably it should not be there given the lack of sourcing and obvious promotional intent of the sockfarm, but I thought I'd leave it here for your opinion. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:32, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll remove the NJ cats. As far as I know this was always a Canadian company. There may have been outlets in NJ, but there was no justification offered when I challenged the claim that it was headquartered in NJ. In fact, there was  a lengthy discussion on my talk page in which one of the socks agreed that we should not list it  Meters (talk) 23:35, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I've also removed the US headquarters claim from the body. It's not clear that they ever actually had a US division and headquarters as opposed to some stores there. A US distribution centre is not the same thing. Meters (talk) 23:41, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Headquarters 

message: This IP address has been asking multiple users to edit this page for them. Not really sure what to do about that, but I wanted to bring it up since it looks like this page has had problems with sockpuppets before. Lcodyh803 (talk) 22:18, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I had to replace this, since the IP below me removed it, which leads me to believe they are the same person as the IP mentioned above. If they remove this again without discussion, it's probably true. Lcodyh803 (talk) 22:18, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry removed by mistake by making edit request.--222.117.76.175 (talk) 22:22, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  IP address 

message: A work here of text source is improved with reliable sources to reflect cats headquarters from Canada also, without lacking of sources. 222.117.76.175 (talk) 22:11, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, but sock puppets don't get to make edit requests. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:43, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 18 January 2020 

message: Someone (a sock?) left a message on my talk page, asking me to replace the article text with this.
--DiamondRemley39 (talk) 19:33, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Same. -Trilletrollet (talk) 20:06, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: (ec) There is no valid reason for a good-faith IP to suddenly show up on users' pages requesting proxy edits. This would likely be Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ConsumersDistributingonline. The article is indefinitely protected because of this user's persistent socking, and one of his tactics now is to try to get good faith editors to make his edits for him. I've had requests too (and I'm the one who actually opened the original SPI). Meters (talk) 20:21, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: They (diff. IP addresses) just tried same request on another editor's Talk as well. Schazjmd (talk) 21:21, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ConsumersDistributingonline. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 21:25, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

text: Thoughts? Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 22:05, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that would be helpful for all of us editors who might never have encountered this sort of tactic before. Schazjmd (talk) 22:12, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The user is persistent enough that this is warranted. Meters (talk) 22:27, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

text:  It's probably a good idea. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:57, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

text: Note that  is asking a similar question at AN ("Editnotice about well-intentioned proxy editing"). Schazjmd (talk) 14:54, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: (You didn't ping me? Awww....) Yes, we have a similar problem elsewhere. I'm very impressed by 's suggested notice above, and propose to plagiarize adopt/adapt it. -- Hoary (talk) 23:11, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: (Some folks get irritated by pings when their immediate attention isn't needed, I've kind of been defaulting in that direction out of excess deference...)  Schazjmd (talk) 23:16, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sock contact? 

message: Please note that a recent article at Retail Insider (specifically, 25 Years Since the Closure of Consumers Distributing Stores (Retrospective)) is not useful as a reference because it appears most of its information was sourced from this Wikipedia article. Mindmatrix 12:53, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: However, this "TVO" article  does seem more useful. Just flagging here for the future. Martinp (talk) 13:57, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The TVO article is very good. Moreover, it shows up many of the errors in this wikiarticle. It could provide a guide for rewriting much of this encyclopedia entry. Thanks  for finding it! — SpikeToronto 19:47, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: , with the TVO article, the French Wikipedia article can also serve as a guide, however the majority of sources are in French; from the dates of the sources, they can surely be found in English. It's a shame that I can't contribute anonymously to this page, I'll give you the rest for rewriting!--71.6.197.51 (talk) 15:49, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Other sources