Jump to content

Talk:Sainsbury's/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

J Sainsbury/Sainsbury's

Can someone with admin priviledge move this page to Sainsbury's in accordance with the MoS? Kokiri 10:25, 11 Jul 2004 (UTC)

J Sainsbury plc is the corporate name of the Sainsbury's Group and as such the page details the parts of that group. I don't think anybody following the link Sainsbury's will be shocked to arrive at J Sainsbury plc. Even if they were, the first part of the group that is detailed is Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd. - what most people will be looking for. To separate each part onto seperate pages would not help either, it would spoil what at the minute gives a very good overview of the group and would not be as effective on separate pages. I would argue the status quo should be maintained, but I am open to any other views. Regards, Mark 18:15, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Further "J Sainsbury plc" is just that - a PLC, and listed on the stock exchange. To redirect links of J Sainsbury plc to Sainsbury's (e.g. from FTSE 100 Index) can only reduce the accuracy of Wikipedia.Mark 18:21, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I suggest this article be split. Kokiri 18:23, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

With Homebase and Shaws sold there's little left apart from the UK supermarkets, so I don't agree. Carina22 08:33, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Odd. The concensus here seemed to be to keep it as it was, but the article is now headered as Sainsbury's, not J Sainsbury plc. Digifiend (talk) 09:57, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

What does this mean?

"To keep track of these large amounts of stock lines sainsburys uses the RSS system, however this system if floored due to human erro this causes stock problems. " Obviously erro -> error but I have absolutely no idea what an RSS system is, what flooring it would involve, what kind of problems might entail. Can this be clarified? Notinasnaid 10:27, 27 April 2006 (UTC)


RSS stands for Retek Stock Systems or Retail Store Systems (or a mixture of both, depending on who you ask)

It's the store element of a suite of Retek aplications that manage the Supply Chain

RSS stands for Retek Store Systems. It does not stand for Retail Store Systems. The "floored" referred to above should read "flawed". However I would challenge whether it is correct to say that the system is flawed as human errors can cause stock problems - surely human errors can affect any system dealing with any subject (even Wikipedia!). As such should this section not be removed? It is purely a point of the writer's opinion, and as such hardly contributes to an understanding of Sainsbury's or it's systems. 195.92.101.11 17:15, 4 April 2007 (UTC)James

Template

Is that a template at bottom of page or just a table? If template what is the name? Charlie 14:36, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Slogans

the user Mark 83 keeps deleting the slogans section. His latest reason was that it "didn't need a heading". If you feel it can be included without a heading then do the edit, but DO NOT delete something because you don't like it and think it is "not importnat". The slogans are part of the company's history and were used to get customers to shop at the stores. Thus a business is built on them, mixed with quality and service. Just as important as anything. 74.65.39.59 21:40, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

The more recent edit by the user lawsonrob, is more correct. Made the corrections rather than just moan, force his POV on the rest of us and say "do it better". 74.65.39.59 21:46, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I did delete it yes, but once you raised your objections I tried to improve upon it. You then reverted my edits, i.e. did exactly what you accuse me of doing. As for slogans being "just as important as anything"? The reason Sainsbury's have been in trouble until recently was the fact shelves were not stocked and it had not countered high prices compared to Tesco and ASDA. The reason it's now turning a corner is almost entirely because the company has got the supply chain sorted and continues to invest in price decreases - while the slogan has played only a very small part in increased sales. Mark83 23:11, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

You miss the point. You didn't improve any of the edits, you deleted all of them - TWICE. Also, the slogans do not play a minor role, they play a major role. Slogans are the foundation commericals are based on. They get inside the public heads - hence the reason for having them in the 1st place. I did not imply that slogans have helped Sainsbury's recent increased sales, but that slogans help build the company from the first one used. "Good Food Cost Less At Sainsburys" got into the heads of the public. It worked and help make the company the NUMBER 1 supermarket for decades. Don't try and act like slogans and advertsing do not play a vital role in business - THEY DO! Look at Tesco ("Pile it high, sell it cheap" and "Every little helps"), Asda ("That's Asda price"), Mars Bars ("A Mars a day helps you work rest and play"), Heinz ("Beanz Meanz Heinz"), Esso ("The Esso Sign Means Happy Motoring") and so on.... these are important and vital for the advertising of business. Do you think Sainsbury's would have got as far as it had without good public advertising? 74.65.39.59 00:53, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Before you go mouthing off you should check your facts. The only time I removed them was this edit. You then replaced them with this edit. My next edit DID NOT delete the facts, it was simply a formatting change. I took your point about the slogans being important and tried to improve upon them which is surely what Wikipedia is about? Mark83 01:43, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Accpet my apologies for that comment then, my mistake entirley on that! 74.65.39.59

"Pile it high, sell it cheap" was never a Tesco slogan, it was Jack Cohen's business philosophy. I'm not discounting the benefits of marketing, I'm just questioning the importance you seem to be placing on it. After all, it may have been losing market share to Tesco in the 1990s, but Sainsbury's was still flush with cash. If marketing is really so effective how did Sainsbury's get knocked into second place in '95? Surely they could have spent a fortune on marketing to fight back and regain number one status. Sainsbury's problem was people figured out "..food costs less" at Tesco and its pretty good too! The large list of slogans since then proves marketing cannot help a company which can't get the basics of its business right! Mark83 02:03, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Of course selling items cheaply and being good helps a company, I never said it didn't. However, my argument is it is that, WITH a mixture of good marketing. And no, Sainsburys couldn't have just fought back with a lot of adverts, it would be a mixture of all 3 - Good food, good prices and good marketing. Tesco's excelled on all three, (the slogan "every little helps" and the comic commericals really did get into public heads), that's why they took the #1 slot away from Sainsburys. And Sainsbury's themselfs DID prove advertising helps, in 2002, when they blew a fortune on commericals, got Jamie Oliver in and just fought off the growing Asda to retain the #2 slot that year, based on those adverts alone (although Asda pushed Sainsbury's to #3 in 2003) Ok, I may have been wrong with "Pile it High, Sell it cheap", but does that take away from the point I made? no. It wasn't the only example I gave, I gave plenty of others and all the others prove my point wonderfully, even If I do say so myself. 74.65.39.59 11:40, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

  • oh and I have to add (Re: John Cleese) just because you have a quote from a company dosen't mean it is a fact. It could just as easily be an excuse. Sainsbury's sales had been falling heavily for a number of years before, how do you think they lost the #1 postion to Tesco's in 1995? I think falling sales may have played a role in that, that is "the facts" 74.65.39.59
Yes, it could have just been an excuse and I have no problem with what you changed the article to. I have to say though, Sainsbury's were on a downhill slide and rather than using adverts to slam the brakes on I think it's widely accepted that the "Value to shout about" campaign put the foot on the accelerator! I think we're agreed advertising is important but can't do much to help a failing company. For example Asda pushed Sainsbury's into 2nd place in 2003 because by 2002/2003 Peter Davis' automated depots were onstream and failing dramatically to deliver what was promised (starting the now famous phenomenon of empty shelves). Mark83 12:09, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
  • I have to say I liked the John Cleese adverts and found them amusing. The thing that annoyed me most about them however was he was telling us there was value to shout about at Sainsbury's, yet, when you got to the store there was hardly any value at all (Tesco quailty for higher prices). I would say that the adverts could have worked, possibly, if the stores had lived up to the commericals trumpet blowing. 74.65.39.59
Here's an interesting take on the campaign.[1] Mark83 12:34, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that was very intresting. Thank you. Indeed, I used to do that when i'd pop into Safeway to get the reduced deals they advertsied and then go to Tesco's for the rest. lol. 74.65.39.59 12:44, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

  • I think there was another slogan which you could add to the list that Sainsburys used in the early 1990s. I think it was something along the lines of 'Everything and the Essentials' but im not too sure if that was right I certainly remember Sainsbury having a slogan with the word Essentials in the early 90s. Also is it worth mentioning that I remember seeing on a list programme that some early 1990s Sainsburys advert had featured a pre fame Catherine Zeta Jones. --Wrh1973 09:15, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
The Catherine Zeta Jones advert was in 1992 and she did it for £100,000. "In 1992, she made a Sainsbury's commercial for £100,000" (http://film.guardian.co.uk/features/featurepages/0,,798933,00.html)--Mattm591 17:09, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Staffing

I have updated the staffing area of the page with more information and have made it more brief. I feel this version is more appropriate as a Sainsbury's manager, and feel that any reverting should be explained here rather than it being unnecessarily changed without thought. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.100.196.82 (talk • contribs)

I'm a little confused, apologies. Firstly, I looked back at what used to be the Staffing section, and as a Sainsbury's employee, I found it to be very accurate. The only part I thought was subjective and didn't think reflected the internal workings of Sainsbury's as a whole was the comment that the Produce dept. is the most important dept. to the company, and therefore staff availability was very high on the agenda. This would be a priority on a store-by-store basis. For example, a store scoring high on MAC but low on MCM (especially queue length) would devote more time and energy into the checkout department. Again, a shift in importance to GM can only be judged on a store-by-store basis. Nevertheless, department hierarchy, naming of departments, multi-department training needs and mention of the recent introduction of a PR Ambassador is all true.

I see the entire section was removed due to lack of sources being cited? Well, the problem with that is, documents referring to things such as departmental hierarchy or other such internal workings are not available to people who are not Sainsbury's staff, and publishing them to the internet would probably result in disciplinary action.

On the one hand I couldn't care less how staffing in Sainsbury's is portrayed on Wikipedia and even question how relevant it is to the article, as how many people actually care about what goes on within the store? Secondly, articles such as Tesco and ASDA don't have 'Staffing' sections, the closest seems to be the 'Employee relations' section of ASDA, but that mainly mentions publically notable occasions when the company and its staff have warranted media recognition. So even if everything could be cited, is it worth mentioning in the first place?

On the other hand, I guess an employee relations section could be included, as Sainsbury's provides a colleague discount, encourages employee relations with the local community (re: PR Ambassador, Active Kids scheme), promotes equality in the workplace rigidly and regularly encourages staff to participate in charitable events (e.g. Comic Relief), all of which are publically relevant things. But crap like the difference between a CSA and CTS seems completely irrelevant to anyone. Including staff. Mentality 18:46, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree with user Mentality on this point - to be honest if the article is going to contain a section on staffing, then it should give examples from across the business, not just one area. However having said that I think the whole section is pretty irrelevant, as role descriptions, job titles and structures change on a semi-regular basis to react to business requirements, and therefore are likely to be obsolete unless updated continuously.sainsbury's recyle 100 million plastic bags through it's recyle point.

Sainsburys Market

Is it worth mentioning the "Sainsbury's Market?" I've only seen this in Victoria, London (more info on [2]. It's bigger than a Sainsbury's Central or Local, and the same size as some of their smaller supermarkets. Mojo 19:09, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Mojo, The Sainsburys Market concept was initially trialled in a short lived venture with Sir Terrence Conran's 'Bluebird' store in the king's Road, Chelsea. This store opened in March 2002. The idea behind the concept was to stock a much larger range of fresh meat, produce, bakery than in a normal store. The Staff were all employed for their knowledge and passion for food. Sainsburys leased the ground floor part of the Bluebird building and converted it into 'Sainsburys Market at Bluebird'. The concept was a great idea and the new Pimlico store was supposed to be similar, but on a much larger scale. Sadly for all of us who worked on the concept, it didn't succeed as well as we had hoped. The Chelsea store was closed around 2004 and the concept has been gradually removed from the Pimlico store.

So, to answer your question, I don't think it is really important to add it to the main page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doolally w7 (talk • contribs) 23:15, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Sainsbury's dominance in postal districts

I've recently added this (I feel) useful bit of information regarding where Sainsbury's has market dominance.

According to CACI, as of 2006, Sainsbury's has market dominance in 8 postcode areas; TQ (Torquay), SN (Swindon), GU (Guildford), RH (Redhill), DA (Dartford), SE (South East London), EN (Enfield) and WV (Wolverhampton).[1]

However, it has been removed twice, once by User:Mark83 and second by User:Benon. Now Mark has called the information 'random' and feels I should've added a source for a postcode map which I compared to the map on the BBC article which is a fair point, but why this mistake warrants deletion of the figures is beyond me. Benon feels the information is too out of date, but in reality, information like this from reliable sources is hard to come by, and I would doubt anyone would argue with its implication; that Sainsbury's is dominant in Southern England. Besides, how much has the pattern shown by the data actually changed in the two years since? Sainsbury's has hardly rushed to open stores over northern England which has rapidly shifted its regional dominance. I feel it is better to bring this issue up here, and I welcome any opinions, and if it must stay removed then so be it; but I personally think it's very useful to the reader. Asdfasdf1231234 (talk) 13:50, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Couple of things:
  • Although I raised the issue that the postcode map should have been referenced also, I'll admit I was too hasty in removing the section without discussion.
  • I accept that the data is probably still representative. But as I said at Asdfasdf1231234's talk page, Sainsbury's has announced a quite aggressive (in its own historical context) expansion strategy for the next few years. But that's for the future, like I said its probably still largely representative.
Yeah, that's what I didn't get. Because I didn't see how they could've have markedly changed their dominance in most areas in the two year period (even with an agressive expansion policy), but thanks for clarifying your position. Asdfasdf1231234 (talk) 21:04, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
  • I'm a bit worried about the accuracy though - Asdfasdf1231234 you raised the question of verifiability - I don't understand how you've accurately matched a postcode map with the pretty low resolution one on the BBC site - "Each catchment area comprises 200,000 households on average and represents an aggregation of individual postcode sectors within individual towns, cities and London regions."? As I understand it postcode sectors can be very small in towns? Mark83 (talk) 19:04, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your response. Well i'll just say all I did: I used this map and had the BBC map open aswell, and just copied the colours that corresponded to the districts. It wasn't too hard to do really, just a bit time consuming. I don't think i've made any mistakes, but if I have they can easily be corrected. I don't understand your last point though with postcode sector size? I think all it's trying to say is it's the combination of all postcodes for each letter i.e. HU1, HU2 and so on, so 'HU' is one district. I think it's just worded a bit funny. Asdfasdf1231234 (talk) 21:02, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
[3], Makes for some interesting analysis, the biggest market share is 24.6%, calling 24.6% "dominance" sounds a little stretchy to me, I don't have access to Tesco figures but I wouldn't think there is a significant deviation.Benon (talk) 23:17, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Interesting figures indeed. Although aren't postcodes more localised than those regions? For example, while they may have 16.9% of the Midlands 'region' who's to say they don't have a much higher percentage in Wolverhampton (WV postcode area)? Admittedly there is some discrepency between the Sainsbury's source and the TNS Worldpanel figures (14.9 (Sainsbury's site) vs. 16.22 (TNS)). This recent BBC article gives a national figure of 16.4%. How confusing =\ Still, I think the localised postcode stats are useful in so far as they show areas where the supermarket performs well, even if 'dominance' needs to be reworded. Asdfasdf1231234 (talk) 00:16, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Maybe something more generalised along the lines of Sainsbrys has its largest market shares in London and it's lowest market share in NI or something like this, the articles seems to lack a market share section! Benon (talk) 21:41, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Sainsbury's heyday

QUOTE: "The first SavaCentre store (and the first hypermarket in the UK) was opened in Washington, Tyne and Wear, in 1977"

This cannot be right. Carrefour opened hypermarkets in the early 1970s per http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Carrefour and their Bristol hypermarket was there when I lived in Bristol in 1978-1979. I very much doubt that the Tyne & Wear SavaCentre was the first hypermarket in the UK. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MarkyMarkD (talk • contribs) 12:53, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

History

The history section seems to be completely unreferenced. Some of it seems to come from two books about the company, The Best Butter in the World, and JS 100 as well as from the J Sainsbury web site history section. If this is the case these should presumably be given as the source. There are some "facts" which I think are probably wrong. For example, what record is there of the founders saving £125 to open the first shop, and JB Sainsbury joined the company much earlier than 1915. Some sentences such as the one about the cleanliness of the stores, seem to be not so much history, as a comparison between then and now, with an opinion about its relative success today added in. Is it possible for someone to add some references or at least mark the page as needing to have this done? TamaraStaples (talk) 20:35, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

I will tag the article, but I can't get the references --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 22:07, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
The article is now pretty well referenced Dormskirk (talk) 18:11, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Revenue

I don't know much about finance, but how can revenue be less than net profit? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.97.210.186 (talk) 13:08, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Ahh, perhaps the author meant to write billion? 81.97.210.186 (talk)

Checkout Equipment - PLU Groups?

Each till has a PLU Group system and on non-barcode and products that may not always have a code to scan, they can easily scan the PLU groups to find the right product.

What on earth are PLU groups? Should there be a link to another page explaining this? Also, I'm not convinced by the grammar of this sentence, but that could be because I don't know what PLU groups are. Metamoof (talk) 10:28, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Complacency

I reworded this:

"As a result of being complacent during the 1990s, Tesco became the market leader in 1995, and Asda became the second-largest in 2003, demoting Sainsbury's into third place."

The reference to 'being complacent' is too vague (and slightly accusatory); it's not cited; and in addition, the sentence as it was worded suggests that Tesco managed to achieve first place by being complacent in the 1990s, which obviously isn't what was meant. Instead I've amended the sentence to state only that Tesco overtook Sainsbury's in 1995. - Aculeo (talk) 10:26, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Financial performance

I removed the Financial performance section and was reverted. I consider this statistical detail too, well, detailed for an encyclopaedia, which attempts to maintain a general interest. Wikipedia is not a complete exposition of all possible details; it doesn't list, for example, the league table finishes in each year for football teams. Such detail would be contained in specialist works on the subject, similarly, this financial details must have a place somewhere in literature, just not here. I'd think a graph would be a suitable compromise, since any change in figures might be suitable for an encyclopaedia. Clearly, my view is not universal. What do others think? - Jarry1250 [Who? Discuss.] 20:42, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

On second thoughts, it seems other pages have a similar section, so I'll open it up on the Village Pump. - Jarry1250 [Who? Discuss.] 20:47, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

3rd largest again

See here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12336559 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.98.10.96 (talk) 13:24, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

History section titles and claims

The section titles and some of the primary source claims seem to be a bit POV. Can the History section be improved or does it need some heavy trimming? Grim23★ 14:48, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

hi i — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.0.175.133 (talk) 00:19, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

News coverage of Sainsburys

I am pretty sure that Sainsburys was in the news on Radio Four this morning (November 14 2012), when it was described as Britain's third biggest supermarket. If I find out what the news was about, I might add it to the article, as this was help to update the article. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 11:19, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Well, I heard the reports on the Radio Four programme called You and Yours today, when it was said that the supermarket had reached 6% profits at the start of the year 2012. I hope that people do not mind but I have added it to the article. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 14:31, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Sainsbury's Bank

I had thought that Sainsbury's Bank was in conjunction with Halifax, not Bank of Scotland (they're technically the same company, but the branding is different, I think) --me_and 21:00, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)

No. Sainsbury's (55%) and Bank of Scotland (45%) established Saisnbury's bank in 1997. BOS and Halifax only merged in 2001.Mark83 17:52, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Sainsbury's bank also gives money out for free. This is a fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.63.226.141 (talk) 16:46, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Ethics

Could a section on the ethics of this supermarket be added perchance?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.218.103.233 (talk • contribs)

They are keen on pushing recycling to both staff and customers. They are also keen on Fairtrade, being the first supermarket to stock the first Fairtrade ice cream (along with selected Asdas) --Mattm591 21:07, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Also, all Sainsburys banana's are now Fairtrade as standard Blacksilkandy 17:17, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I hope no Wikipedian will fall into the trap of accepting that 'Fairtrade' (a meaningless marketing word licensed by a multi-national for-profit marketing company) has anything to do with 'fair trade'. Glynhughes (talk) 19:06, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Indeed. Just try buying a banana in the UK nowadays that isn't "fairtrade". Edwardx (talk) 19:11, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Spelling mistakes

Hi there are lots of spelling mistakes in the table https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Sainsbury%27s#20x20_Sustainability_Plan but I cannot for the life of me work out how to edit the table?? if you just put the text in a spell-checker it comes up with tons of mistakes, really bad. Can somebody please tell me how to edit a table??? I don't have time right now to create a new table from scratch... thanks! ~J349 (talk) 14:30, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

The table is in template {{Sainsbury's 20x20 Sustainability Plan}}. I have corrected some spelling errors for you. Keith D (talk) 17:22, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Oh great thanks :) ~J349 (talk) 08:55, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Sainsbury's. 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:

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 IITalk to my owner:Online 08:24, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Sainsbury's. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 10:22, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 25 external links on Sainsbury's. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 22:35, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on Sainsbury's. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 15:29, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Sainsbury's. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 13:17, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

  1. ^ "Tesco 'top' in more parts of the UK". BBC News. Retrieved 2008-05-22.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sainsbury%27s/Archive_1&oldid=1079223454"