Talk:Cracker Jack

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

—Dear Whomever, In your article about Cracker Jack you mention both 1912 and 1913 as the first year for prizes included with the snack. Which is it? How do I certify the research? john goss

Contents

[edit] Complaints/good comments sections

I removed the complaints and good comments sections, since they are necessarily subjective and aren't encyclopedic. Dr. Sunglasses 22:56, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] hrm.

Boy, the "complaints" section is really awkward and... dumb. We should probably get rid of it.

Took it out. It was awful and pointless.Malkmut 07:03, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Plural

Why is Cracker Jack referred to in the plural in the Popular Culture section? The brand is Cracker Jack, not Cracker Jacks. The plural does not even make sense. What are three Cracker Jacks? Three pieces of caramel-coated pieces of popcorn? Two caramel-coated pieces of popcorn and a peanut? One piece of caramel-coated popcorn and two peanuts? Three peanuts?

Hey guy who created this Plural section: get over it.

My vote, like attorneys general and courts martial, is for Crackers Jack. Mrinsuperable (talk) 08:45, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] CJ and American pride

Some of that quantitative analysis of Cracker Jack's decline over the years from the linked article could be added herein. I just finished a box and, as usual, found only four peanuts where there used to be maybe a dozen. And calling that scrap of paper a "prize" is like calling Bazooka Joe a "graphic novel". I don't think it stretches NPOV to note that the one thing that has remained constant about this product over the past 40 years is that hardly anyone can resist pointing out that "it used to be a lot better when I was a kid". And they're right. Asat 00:05, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

  • I often find more peanuts than I want, so you might have got a bad lot. I would assume the turn to paper "prizes" came about as a result of either a suit, or fears of one, due to stupid little kids possibly ingesting Cracker Jack's little plastic rings and such stuff as that. One word: Liability. Never mind the dental costs from that good stuff. :b Baseball Bugs 00:11, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Prizes change date

Does anybody have a source for exactly when they stopped including toys and started including paper prizes? 129.92.250.41 19:06, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't know but I think the prize detereoration was a gradual process, or at least happened in stages. When I was a kid, in the 70s I remember getting plastic prizes, like a little whistle. Later, maybe in the 80s or 90s I remember noting a decline; the prizes became at best cardboard, though they still came in a little envelope. Now the prizes seem to be only paper, and they essentially ARE the envelope. --Ericjs (talk) 04:15, 14 December 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Mindless Trivia

Truly pointless, worthless article. Complete waste of bandwidth, and it steals traffic from better, more informed sites due to wikiality's skewed and gamed google ranking.

This "article" is 95% trivia, and is promotional material for commercial products of various descriptions. There is almost no genuine fact or background on the product in question, and no valid source to prove the little that is there. Much of the "facts" here have been stolen from the Cracker Jack site, in clear violation of copyright.

Improve it considerably, or delete it. It's typical wikiality. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.151.226.164 (talk) 17:07, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Copyright violation vs. free advertising? If you've got an issue with the article, fix it. Deleting it is unacceptable, as Cracker Jack is a very well-known product. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 01:15, 11 May 2008 (UTC)