Talk:Rich Energy

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

This article is rated B-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:

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.

Formula One Low‑importance

This article is part of WikiProject Formula One, an attempt to improve and standardize articles related to Formula One, including drivers, teams and constructors, events and history. Feel free to join the project and help with any of the tasks or consult the project page for further information.

View the task list
Discuss the project
Help out with Portal:Formula OneFormula OneWikipedia:WikiProject Formula OneTemplate:WikiProject Formula OneFormula One articles

Low

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

Name change to Lightning Volt

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.T v x1 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]

Issues with the lead (and article)

Apart from the total ambiguity concerning the company's name, the second paragraph states: "On 16 July 2019, Rich Energy claimed to have announced that they have renamed their company name to "Lightning Volt Ltd.""

this is not supported by the provided sources, who refer to documents retrieved from Companies House, not to any announcement by Rich Energy or Lightning Volt. The Rich Energy twitter has still been active (with revised logo). Haas F1 stated Rich Energy is not behind on payments and as such will remain on the car. Of course this might very well be a deal with Rich Energy Racing Ltd. Furthermore, even if Rich Energy Ltd. has been renamed to Lightning Volt Ltd. the drink could still be named Rich Energy. I propose to rewrite the sentence and the next as:

Information filed under Companies House suggest that, as of 16 July 2019, Rich Energy Ltd. has been renamed to Ligtning Volt Ltd. These documents also revealed that William Storey and Croatian colleague Zoran Terzic have been relieved of their function as directors. (sources from original can remain)

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]

"Claims" to make the drink

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]