Talk:Amy's Kitchen

"Gluten-Free"

It should be noted--unless things have changed very recently--that Amy's "Gluten-Free" products come with the warning: "Manufactured on equipment that processes wheat", meaning those with severe wheat/gluten allergies/intolerances have a high risk of an attack from cross contamination. 69.246.217.44 (talk) 01:43, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Is this perhaps a regional thing? I don't have any of their food in my freezer at the moment, but I swear I've eaten one of their pizzas before, and I always check for the "Manufactured on equipment that processes wheat" since the cross contamination would make me sick, too. Sophus Bie ^(talk) 05:37, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Dunno. My region is midwest, but I've seen on Celiac forums where others were outraged at the marketing of their products as "gluten free", and labelled as manufactured on contaminated machines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.246.217.44 (talk) 02:33, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Amy's Kitchen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141214092106/http://www.farmaid.org/atf/cf/%7B6ef41923-f003-4e0f-a4a6-ae0031db12fb%7D/AMYS_FARM_AID_2014_PRESS_RELEASE.PDF to http://www.farmaid.org/atf/cf/%7B6ef41923-f003-4e0f-a4a6-ae0031db12fb%7D/AMYS_FARM_AID_2014_PRESS_RELEASE.PDF

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:19, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Poorly sourced new additions

@Saphirebud12: Since you don't seem to be familiar with how sourcing works on Wikipedia, let me help. Per WP:V, Wikipedia requires that "any material whose verifiability is challenged or likely to be challenged" must be attributed "to a reliable, published source". You provided four sources for the claim that Amy's is not certified gluten-free and that the items contain gluten, but none of the sources seem to be reliable.

According to the policy linked above, the burden of proof is on you (as the editor adding the contested material) to provide a source and demonstrate that it is reliable. Examples of generally reliable sources would include papers by recognized experts or reporting in mainstream newspapers. Anonymous message boards and posts by bloggers with no substantive qualifications don't cut it. Please do not re-add the material without first gaining consensus on this talk page. If you're interested, more information can be found at the policy and supplement pages about self-published sources, primary sources, and bold edits followed by discussion. —Granger (talk · contribs) 00:24, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Saphirebud12, I agree with Mx. Granger about the quality of your references. The first two are random blogs and the second two are random anonymous comments on various noticeboards. We need truly reliable sources, with professional editorial control and a reputation for accuracy and correcting errors. These sources do not qualify. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:10, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

@Mx. Granger: The Gluten Dude is an extremely notable figure among people with Celiac disease/ Gluten intolerance. He even has a book published. Most Newspapers don't talk about things concerning Celiac disease due to the "diet fad" surrounding it. A controversy is not stating that it is one way or another, it simply means there is contention. Both The Gluten Dude and Iowa Eats are not anonymous. The other sources are and I understand removing those. Additionally, the first claim about the product not being certified gluten-free and made in a facility that contains wheat is backed by the link to Amy's website where they assert that. If the sources are not acceptable, I will simply add in the beginning that they are not certified gluten-free per their website, please get back to me on your thoughts for my next edit Saphirebud12 (talk) 19:29, 28 June 2019 (UTC)6/28/2019

The Gluten Dude doesn't seem to have a Wikipedia article and a quick search didn't turn up much independent information about him, so I don't see any obvious reason to think that's a reliable source. I would be glad to see more information on that, though.

Thanks, material cited to Amy's website is fine with me. I have rewritten your addition so that it follows the source. —Granger (talk · contribs) 20:28, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

@Mx. Granger: Why did you remove the part about them not being certified? The website itself says that they only do in house testing. None of their products are certified, it's not an opinion and it should be noted. Beyond Celiac is a highly credible organization and the link explains that being certified is the only way for third-party verification. I added a bit to the last sentence. Everything follows the source now and everything is undeniable factual.Saphirebud12 (talk) 20:38, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Can you quote where on the website they say they only do in-house testing? I can't find it. The Beyond Celiac source doesn't mention Amy's. —Granger (talk · contribs) 21:24, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

@Mx. Granger: The Beyond Celiac explains that being certified is the only way to have 3rd party verification. The Amys page says they have safeguards, but because their products are not certified they cannot be 3rd party. Additionally, I can add a picture of their products showing that they have some certifications, like vegan for example, but lack any official gluten-free verification. Also, the statement "By 1989, the company's... never sell." is not backed by a citation, so unless you have one, I vote to remove. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saphirebud12 (talk • contribs) 16:33, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Can you point out where the source says that Amy's products are not certified? As for Beyond Celiac, unless they have published something discussing Amy's, I don't see that it makes sense to cite them here.

I agree with you about "By 1989...never sell." —Granger (talk · contribs) 02:26, 4 July 2019 (UTC)