Talk:SUPERthrive

POV

The content here may or may not be true, but it is not sourced and certainly not written from a neutral point of view. Use of terms such as "legitimate" imply that SUPERthrive is otherwise illegitimate. This may once again be true, but it needs reliable sourcing that others have said that. -- Mattinbgn/^talk 23:20, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. The facts are there but the wording needs to be cleaned up. Wikipedia is for facts so using redundant terms like "supposedly" are not necessary. Report the facts, give both sides of the story equal weight, and move on. The article isn't bad though especially considering the lack of knowledge about how supertrhive works and their refusal to give even a simplified ingredient list. If someone with better writing skills than I would simply re-word it then I think it would be fine.

I've pretty much tried to take the POV out of the article and I'm working on getting some more sources for the article. Would you say that we can take off the neutrality template? WriterHound (talk) 04:40, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article !

To me, this article reads as a poorly written advertisement. Unfortunately, I don't know enough about the subject to edit it.

Specific issues:

The product is certified by the "WARF testing lab" but there is no indication of what WARF is an acronym for.

Paragraph 4 starts with: "In support of the plant regulator clarification amendment called “A National Tribute” on the SUPERthrive boxes..." This sentence is very difficult to follow.

NATIONAL TRIBUTE: In 1972, 6 bipartisan votes in the U.S. Congress protected SUPERthrive® non-toxic and unrivaled formula from pointless, illegal pressures for exposure to piracy. The legislation was supported by 35 leading professional, trade and horticultural associations and over 3,000 professional petitions affirming the environment-aiding essentiality ofSUPERthrive®. The nation voiced its concern for the availability of SUPERthrive® in the U.S. The General Counsel of the U.S. House of Representatives Agriculture Committee said, "The agriculturists all rose up to support you." ^^ This makes no sense to me.

Five "references" are given but only one leads anywhere. Having the bottle label as a reference seems unusual at best but if it is to be used, the sporting thing to do would seem to be to quote the bottle label text.

+1 ref https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b84zJtUjONs

C7nel (talk) 00:32, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on SUPERthrive. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 16:29, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]