This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Cahk (talk | contribs) at 09:31, 27 January 2024 (Reverted 1 edit by Nermast Betelgeuse Herman (talk) to last revision by Cahk). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 09:31, 27 January 2024 by Cahk (talk | contribs) (Reverted 1 edit by Nermast Betelgeuse Herman (talk) to last revision by Cahk)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Please click here to leave me a message. I'll use Template:Reply to to respond on my talk page.
 Archives |
Please respond to my message
Hi Cahk! I hope this find you well. This is my first time using wiki to chat in the "talk" section about edits. I'm the user in the chat (User talk:2601:600:8281:97C0:9426:C1EF:8EFC:99B5). I don't think you've seen my responses, would you please take a look at get back to me. I put many hours into revising the company page with over 40 citations, trustworthy news sources, and peer reviewed papers. The current page is now VERY outdated and needs to accept the updates. If I missed any area/typed something in a personal tone I didn't mean to and am more than happy to have you point those out to me to revise. Thanks! 2601:600:8281:97C0:C92C:9F4C:CD89:3ABC (talk) 09:26, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- An administrator has beat me to it in responding. I've nothing more to add beyond what was stated.--Cahk (talk) 08:00, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Would you please provide specifics of what your concern is? 2601:600:8281:97C0:48E5:D056:E6F2:86E5 (talk) 04:53, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- They were clearly written in non-neutral language - " Your products are only as good as the science behind them (no matter what the marketing or price tries to make you believe)", citing a dozen or more press release is borderline advertorial if not outright advertisement, deleted all references to MLM despite Google searches showing terms MONAT and MLM frequently. As a self-proclaimed "former government research scientist", I am amazed you would even consider citing PR press release as a source despite the fact they are clearly one sided in nature and meant to promote the subject. I don't really know any Wiki editor would let you get away with the obvious promotional edits.--Cahk (talk) 09:18, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Would you please provide specifics of what your concern is? 2601:600:8281:97C0:48E5:D056:E6F2:86E5 (talk) 04:53, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- An administrator has beat me to it in responding. I've nothing more to add beyond what was stated.--Cahk (talk) 08:00, 26 January 2024 (UTC)