Talk:Lipozene

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Skip to table of contents    
Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on 3 January 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lipozene article.

Article policies

[edit] Comments

This article, or "definition", found this page was informative. It details, however briefly, differences from the info-mercials one sees on television and what it actually does. Definitive weight loss discrepancies and concrete legal actions against the company or legal representatives, should raise a flag to the average consumer utilizing the Internet to research product information, legitimacy and viable options to purchase or not. Hugh.Torres (talk) 16:18, 13 January 2008 (UTC) Hugh Hugh.Torres (talk) 16:18, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Delete?

The page says it is nominated for deletion but there is no discussion of it here in the discussion page. Since no reason for deletion is given, and I see no reason to delete, I removed the tag. Don't be a philistine.

--Jon in California 6 Jan 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.127.73.9 (talk) 08:38, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I added the advertisement and no reference tags. This article has undergone numerous rewrites where an anonymous or new user returns the article to it's current advertisement state. I propose reverting the article back to the 00:08, 5 October 2007 edit by 69.140.53.66. So far, that is the most impartial version of the content. ChamPro 19:13, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

The link to the PDF under "References" is a dead link. 68.63.215.207 (talk) 22:40, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Who the hell is Phil Benuto? Either cite this guy, informing us of his relevance, or strike that last sentence? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scola (talk • contribs) 23:54, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Commercial Claim

I believe the reference to percentage of weight loss states that 78% of weight loss was fat. As an editorial comment on the ad, all the information provided is very basic and a pre-teen should be able to make an intelligent decision regarding the claims. I would assume their is more information available regarding this product.Poidogfan (talk) 04:19, 4 January 2008 (UTC)JP