Talk:Arnott's Group

Australia Low‑importance

	Australia portal Arnott's Group is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Food and drink 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

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Food and Drink task list:

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.

Brands Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands 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.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Business Low‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business 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.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was nominated for deletion on 10 October 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

Untitled

what about Nik Nax they were arnott's and just disappeared of the planet —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.6.118.189 (talk) 01:01, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Link between Savoy and Jatz biscuits

They appear to be the same thing. Why are they sold under two different names? In Melbourne you can buy both from most large supermarkets. This deserves a section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.101.221.239 (talk) 06:33, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brockhoff were the original makers of Savoy crackers while Arnott's made the very similar Jatz, which is probably why the packs now have both names on themThe Dart (talk) 00:21, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification of mergers

203.206.102.86 has added clarification of the mergers between Arnott's, Menz, Brockhoff & Guests to become the Australian Biscuit Co, which then became Arnott's Biscuits Pty Ltd. Much tidier, Thanks.The Dart (talk) 13:43, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved to Arnott's Biscuits. Favonian (talk) 18:06, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Arnott's Biscuits Holdings → Arnott's – Arnott's is the common name but it shares it with a department store in Ireland and Scotland. Can we determine if the biscuit company is indeed the more sort after article? It should be noted that their official name is actually "Arnott's Biscuits Limited" now. Relisted. BDD (talk) 16:42, 17 April 2013 (UTC) AnimatedZebra (talk) 16:12, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

- I agree with the above comments. Arnott's is too ambiguous and would always require re-direction (dis-ambiguation), so why not list it as "Arnott's Biscuits Limited" as the above editor suggests?The Dart (talk) 19:15, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

- Why? Andrewa (talk) 08:28, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Arnotts (Ireland) seems quite important, and Arnotts should be a disambiguation page. Maybe Arnott's would be enough to distinguish the two names - if that's insufficient, a different name is needed to disambiguate. Peter James (talk) 23:39, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose removal of Biscuits but Arnott's Biscuits would be more correct by WP BUSINESS format. In ictu oculi (talk) 05:05, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree, Arnott's Biscuits would be a better title - also because the company's website has "© 2013 Arnott's Biscuits Limited" on it. Peter James (talk) 22:04, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support move, but preferably to Arnott's Biscuits as suggested above. The current title is just plain wrong... the article is about the whole history of the company, not just the time it's been legally called Arnott's Biscuits Holdings, which in any case is an official name and not a good article title in this case. Andrewa (talk) 08:28, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the ambiguous name, but Arnott's Biscuits would be OK. Dicklyon (talk) 01:39, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Arnott's Biscuits looks better to me; I agree with the wise folk above. If there are other topics called "Arnott's" then some kind of disambiguation is necessary, but I think the current title is inappropriate. bobrayner (talk) 14:01, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"'Support Arnott's Biscuits"' So it looks like most people agree on "Arnott's Biscuits" as the title, not just Arnott's, so let's do it.The Dart (talk) 23:01, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Closing comments - it appears clear that the consensus is to rename as Arnott's Biscuits and I have gone ahead and requested a G6 to make room for the move. Tiggerjay (talk) 17:13, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Many missing products

Many missing products. But I reuse to waste time again adding them as I have no acceptable links to provide documentation.

Arnotts also had a chip division started at the end of the 60s and early 70s. Many popular products vanished after the mergers.

210.185.119.171 (talk) 13:35, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]