Talk:America's Best Chew

A fact from America's Best Chew appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 19 July 2006. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Red Man, one of the leading U.S. brands of chewing tobacco, has been especially successful in marketing itself with rural sporting events?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2006/July.

Wikipedia

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

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.

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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

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

Recent changes

Cutting out the various pouch/variety descriptions makes sense, because the company is trying to parlay its leadership position into diversification to gather up more market share. If we try to cover that, we're going to have to edit a great deal to keep up with every product launch and product retirement.
Cutting out the leaf vs. plug distinction, on the other hand, bothers me. In 1910, chewing tobacco was plug/twist tobacco that a man cut off with his pocket knife. Red Man distinguished itself for being shredded leaf. It led the market and the twist/plug forms died out gradually, leaving Red Man as the #1 type of non-snuff oral tobacco. They are now (well, a few years back, actually) introducing other forms, but I think it's important for the article to leave in place some indication that the brand was different from the others, early on, by being pouch tobacco. Geogre 09:57, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

dead reference

The reference [8]

^ a b c "Chewing Tobacco Just the Facts", National Institutes of Cancer. Retrieved on 2006-07-18.

is a 404 now. I couldn't find a copy of the article in google or on the page itself (which also uses google as its search engine). As I'm unsure what to do with it now, I just left a comment here. --84.171.15.229 17:54, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see if I can find an equivalent source, as that's really all we need, but I wonder if this could be another victim of web pruning. I hope not, can't imagine so, as the NIC shouldn't be under any pressure. The information in question is relatively easy to find, and I would imagine that someone has copied the content, so it shouldn't be a difficult search. Geogre 11:17, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Correlation with tooth decay and cavities ?

Does anyone know if there is an added risk of tooth decay associated with the use of chewing tobacco ? I suppose I could ask my dentist. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.181.48.145 (talk) 05:24, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Look above: the American Dental Association, and probably your own national dentistry association, are against it and claim an increase in oral cancers and staining. You can check out the dental association in your nation. I'll bet that they have plenty against the practice. At the same time, chewing tobacco was extremely common, and originally cigarettes were "disgusting" in comparison. Geogre (talk) 10:53, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Red-Man2.png Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Red-Man2.png, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 24 October 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 20:08, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Red Man. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050829013012/http://www.boats.com:80/boat-articles/Event+Report-118/Twelve+Red+Man+bass+divisions+hold+super+events/10442.html to http://www.boats.com/boat-articles/Event+Report-118/Twelve+Red+Man+bass+divisions+hold+super+events/10442.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:28, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy?

Have the name and logo been controversial in any way? I would honestly be surprised if they hadn’t, given that this company is definitely not Native American-owned (and thus the brand would fall into the same category as sports mascots like the Cleveland Indians, Washington Redskins, etc.)

Indeed, they sell this tobacco at my workplace and I’m honestly surprised it’s still being made. I mean, it reminds me of “Nigger Hair“ tobacco, which thankfully went out of production decades ago, but they are still making Red Man. 97.116.51.145 (talk) 20:48, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Incredibly racist

I can't believe this is still sold in 2021. 139.138.6.121 (talk) 05:35, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How is tobacco racist?188.172.109.5 (talk) 23:24, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rebranding to America's Best Chew

I am not familiar with this article but I thought it might be worth bringing up that it appears that Red Man is being rebranded as America's Best Chew according to the source linked in the article. I don't know whether this is true or whether that article is credible but I figured I should say something since I got myself into the edit history of this article.

I originally reverted an edit that changed Red Man instances to America's Best Chew because I did not know of the rebranding. Then after finding out I quickly undid my revert. However I did not read the article or verify anything so I'd suggest anyone working on this article to look into that and verify it for themselves and see whether the article is okay as it is or whether an older version should be restored. Thanks. Satricious (talk) 17:07, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I work at a gas station. I cannot find an article from recently talking about the change, but I can say that within the last week we sold out of what we had left of Red Man and are now selling America's Best Chew. The packaging has a note on it that says that it is 'the same Red Man taste'.

I only just now created an account because of that, so I am not familiar with wikipedia talk page culture. Apologies if I do something wrong from ignorance. Being related to your category I felt it best put here instead of a new grouping. I was wanting to know, since the name change does appear to have taken effect, would it be ok to change the name of the article to America's Best Chew, as the first line in it presently states, instead of leaving the former name. Oukakisa (talk) 05:36, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]