Talk:Tahitian Noni
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the Business and Economics WikiProject. |
| Start | rated as start-Class on the assessment scale |
| Mid | rated as mid-importance on the assessment scale |
I have done my best to make this article read less like an advertisement and be more NPOV. I think it would be ok to take off the advertisement tag. Epachamo 19:54, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
I have added much additional information regarding possible nutrious value of noni. I do not know either way whether or not the drink is good for you, but I certainly think the possibilities of either side should be presented here. Therefore I have turned this incredibly one-sided, very negative article into something slightly more neutral.
the sloth_monkey 12:12 AM (Central Time) Thursday, April 27, 2006
OK, this article is definitely biased and reads terribly (Not your edits sloth_monkey, but subsequent ones). There has got to be some balance to this article. Epachamo 04:32, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
I just added some legal information. It is a fact that none of the proposed medical or therapeutic effects of noni products has ever undergine a clinical study. If there were some, these products had to be registered as drugs. Since they are not, it is illegal to chalk any medical or therapeutic effect to noni products. The big companies know this very well and dissociate from any medical ot therapeutic claim. But in network marketing many people act totally illegal claiming miracles affected by noni products. The pseudo scientific links an informations in the article do not change anything in this fact. I am missing this clear statement in the article and will add it in the near future. ghw 09:05, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Company
Shouldn't this article be about the company with a
tag at the top? McKay 20:59, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm going to stub it out eventually if no one has any complaints. McKay 07:09, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] assertion of notability
it is correct that this article doesn't assert it's notability. I will add information to show that it is, in fact, notable as per the primary notability criterion. 1 hour should be enough. McKay 21:21, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
- While, technically, saying that "Tahitian Noni is a notable company..." complies with the requirement of WP:CSD A7, the article doesn't explain why it's notable. Is it the only company which sells noni? Is it the first? Why is noni something I should care about? Your edits haven't solved those problems. While you don't need to explain at great length why noni juice is special, a sentence about it would be helpful. Αργυριου (talk) 21:39, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, it's easy to skirt about the rules to prevent a speedy deletion. That's what I've tried to do. I have more recently shown that it is notable because it has been the subject of multiple items in journalism. I want to add more content, but it's hard to find information that is WP:VERIFYable. Especially with the jillions of pages of people who sell their juice. Most of those sources wouldn't be considered reliable. What I want to say is something like "Tahitian Noni International is the largest producer of Noni products worldwide." that would definitely satisfy A7, but while I believe it's true, It's not WP:A. Similar with any other "claims of notability" that I can make with the company. So I'm not sure where to proceed from here, cept looking in more articles for statements to satisfy A7 and still be WP:A McKay 21:56, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, I found a good one, can we get the CSD tag removed now? Was it really worth an hour of my time? probably not, but whatever. McKay 22:26, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, it's easy to skirt about the rules to prevent a speedy deletion. That's what I've tried to do. I have more recently shown that it is notable because it has been the subject of multiple items in journalism. I want to add more content, but it's hard to find information that is WP:VERIFYable. Especially with the jillions of pages of people who sell their juice. Most of those sources wouldn't be considered reliable. What I want to say is something like "Tahitian Noni International is the largest producer of Noni products worldwide." that would definitely satisfy A7, but while I believe it's true, It's not WP:A. Similar with any other "claims of notability" that I can make with the company. So I'm not sure where to proceed from here, cept looking in more articles for statements to satisfy A7 and still be WP:A McKay 21:56, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Possible Contamination/Poisoning in Spain
User:Caterpillar1985 added information that the warning in Spain had been lifted without any citations. He might have been referring to an article by Mulilever[1], which is incredibly biased and does not state a source for the study either. So I am removing this information and updating it with other reports I have consulted with, unless Caterpillar1985 or anyone else can help verify the matter with reputable information. Thank you. --Email4jonathan (talk) 01:30, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
User:Jschelin recently added the following text without citations, which I have removed until otherwise supported: "It should be noted that the bottles in question were manufactured in Mexico. The company Tahitian Noni International does not have any Noni Juice manufacturing facilities in Mexico and in locations where it is manufactured, each batch of juice is independently lab tested for quality at least 4 times." Plus, whether or not the products are test four times in a lab is irrelevant. Thanks! --Eustress (talk) 23:25, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Added a link to the Spanish Health Ministry page where they clarify the contamination issue. Spanish authorities have lifted their alert and are simply urging consumers to make sure their bottles bear proper labels, and that they purchase futures bottles of juice through approved distribution channels. I'll add more info as it becomes available. Thanks! Tnicorp (talk) 21:34, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
