Talk:Glasgow ice cream wars

funny

"The conflicts, in which vendors raided one another's vans and fired shotguns into one another's windscreens, were more violent than might typically be expected between ice-cream salesmen."

Should it really be in wiki? I dunno, but it made me giggle... 90.202.235.113 (talk) 19:01, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Glasgow, it is a silly place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.156.228.123 (talk) 14:21, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Wouldn't have been funny for the innocent traders and those caught in the crossfire. Imagine going about your daily business, only to be threatened by the underworld gang figures into selling drugs and stolen goods. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.111.120.73 (talk) 00:53, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Glasgow Ice Cream Wars. 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/20020102164150/http://www.innocent.org.uk/cases/glasgow2/ to http://www.innocent.org.uk/cases/glasgow2/

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 07:24, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Glasgow Ice Cream Wars. 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/20041221160154/http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=312182004 to http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=312182004
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041221160154/http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=312182004 to http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=312182004
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930193028/http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/legal/article69736.ece to http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/legal/article69736.ece

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 22:18, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Ice cream template

Should this article even have the "ice cream" template? This is not really that much about ice cream, is it? JIP | Talk 19:38, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

I agree. I have removed the template. —QueenofBithynia (talk) 13:22, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 28 June 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Yet another NCE vs. concision deadlock. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 07:04, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

---

Glasgow ice cream wars → Ice cream wars – "Ice cream war" redirects here. As far as I know, there is no need to mention the city as there are no other instances of "ice cream wars", although I could be mistaken. QueenofBithynia (talk) 17:29, 28 June 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 21:11, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

• Support per nominator. --Spekkios (talk) 02:48, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. I don't see a reason to remove the location. See WP:NCE. --Eldomtom2 (talk) 15:13, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. No reason to remove the location. The place is a major part of the story WP:NCE. In ictu oculi (talk) 12:55, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Sources differ on drug sales

I noticed a little "kerfuffle" between editors a bit ago where someone tried to cite this news article in defense of the idea that no one sold drugs from these vans, wiping out the earlier claim that they did (which is also backed by journalistic citations). Then someone reverted the page, wiping out the side saying it was only rumor. I feel like, if we have some reputable journalistic sources that say drugs were sold, and some that say that was only rumor, we ought to say that outright instead of fighting over which side to emphasize. Everyone seems to agree on some facts (gangsters were involved, stolen goods were sold from some vans, violent conflicts emerged, etc.) so if sources disagree about drug sales that seems notable to me. Mesocarp (talk) 21:37, 30 November 2022 (UTC)