Talk:Victory V

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles 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.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Food and Drink task list:

To edit this page, select here

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink:

Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt
Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar
Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish
Participate in project-related deletion discussions.
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food
Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section

Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The "other" lozenge[edit]

Victory V, Altoids, and Fisherman's Friend are all 200-year-old British lozenges with a robust flavour. However, Victory V has slipped into near-obscurity, which is a shame, because we need more info here about:

History of the product. It's long.
Why the name Victory-V? Which war was it? It was supplied to troops for a long time.
Varieties: regular, gums (no longer made), medicated (which is the only variety now made, unfortunately, but is no longer marketed as such), etc.
Chloroform. Why and when wsa it removed?
Pictures of the product, including historic containers. These are collectibles, there should be plenty out there.

- ProhibitOnions ^(T) 13:34, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can tell you it still had chloroform or ether in until just a few years ago. I bought a packet today - for the first time in a while, since they are getting very hard to find - and they no longer have chloroform or ether in. The flavour is now very different because of that. The ether or chloroform used to give it a cool solventy aroma, and now it is the liquirice that is the dominant flavour. I don't think I will be buying them again, as they have now lost that unique property.

This site (http://www.reachpharmacy.com/shop/customer/product.php?productid=24854) lists the following ingredients: Sugar, Gum Acacia, Liquorice Extract, Glucose Syrup, Ether, Colour E150c, Linseed oil, Flavouring.

The ingredients today are: Sugar, Acacia Gum, Liquorice Extract, Glucose Syrup, Flavourings, Colour (Ammonia caramel), Linssed oil, Menthol. Contains sulphites. 82.39.210.203 (talk) 00:22, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Inscription[edit]

They wre inscribed:

LINSEED

LIQUORICE &

-V-LOZENGE

"VICTORY"

It had to be read from the bottom up. I never found out why. (From my notes and playground memories, so I don't think it can be used in the article). DavidCh0 (talk) 15:04, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Independent Reference[edit]

I've added a link to an article in The Independent, but their server seems to be unavailable at the moment. It was cached by google only a few days ago, so this is hopefully a temporary situation. The google cache is at: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Qs7jXIk49hoJ:www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/minor-british-institutions-victory-v-lozenges-1642783.html+%22Minor+British+Institutions:+Victory+V+lozenges%22&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

The article is also archived at: http://web.archive.org/web/20100807091642/http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/minor-british-institutions-victory-v-lozenges-1642783.html

If The Independent's server doesn't come back in the next few days, maybe someone could substitute the archived URl (if I don't do it myself). 86.7.23.104 (talk) 13:37, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Independent's server did come back, so the reference is OK now. 86.7.23.104 (talk) 13:08, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]