Talk:Proactiv

message: Celebrity endorsements and advertising is one of the main things Proactiv is known for. However there is a delicate balance to maintain to cover all the major celebrity spokespeople, without creating an indiscriminate list.
Proactiv recently sent me a list of omitted celebrity spokespeople and I found two where their endorsement of Proactiv was covered in People magazine. That's Julianne Hough (source) and Olivia Munn (source). In both cases the source articles are more than 250 words (my measure for a "blurb"). 
Was hoping an independent editor might be able to offer a quick opinion on whether they should be added. CorporateM (Talk) 22:54, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Celebrity endorsements 

message: One of the things Proactiv is known for is its advertising and celebrity spokesmodels, currently described in the "Marketing" section. I suggest adding a couple that are missing that were covered by People Magazine to the end of the second-last paragraph of the "Marketing" section as follows:
* "Actresses Julianne Hough and Olivia Munn became celebrity Proactiv spokespeople in 2011 and 2014 respectively.</noiwki>
CorporateM (Talk) 14:25, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Request edit spokesmodels

message: I haven't had much time to work on this article, but for future reference it ought to say something about the cancellation problems the company appears to be known for. Consumers sign up for a subscription – sometimes inadvertently, thinking they are sending off for a sample only – then can't get through to the company to cancel when they find they're being charged monthly. See Jezebel article, for example. SarahSV (talk) 18:01, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm concerned that the article was promoted to GA without mentioning the difficulty of cancelling the credit-card withdrawals. If you google "Proactiv" some of the complaints are apparent, and  mentioned them on COIN in June 2013; see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard/Archive 64#Proactiv Solution. This was the version promoted in October 2013. Pinging . SarahSV (talk) 21:32, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: SlimVirgin, unfortunately both editors are inactive atm, but I have seen LIz holding down the fort on FreeRange's talk page, if you want to try them. I was surprised you felt ConsumerAffairs.com was a reliable source. The website has a disclaimer that says "ConsumerAffairs.com makes no representation as to the accuracy of the information herein...." It's also known for being a shakedown operation that writes negatively about consumer brands, in order to blackmail them into paying a fee. This is discussed briefly by another editor at the bottom of the Talk page at Talk:ConsumerAffairs. I'm surprised there is nothing about it in RSN's archives yet. David King, Ethical Wiki (Talk) 08:09, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: , can you say why you left that material out? It's one of the things the company is best known for, and if you don't like ConsumerAffairs as a source, there are others, including Truth in Advertising ("Five Common Complaints about Guthy-Renker") and Slate ("Don't bother with Proactiv"). SarahSV (talk) 17:48, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Cancellation problems

message: We don't say who manufactures this product and where. I've had a quick look for sources, but so far haven't found anything. SarahSV (talk) 21:35, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Manufacturer

message: Sorry, realized I forgot to respond on the trademark point. That's very easily handled, without the awkward and unencyclopedic tone: "X is a Y, made by Z...". Then that can be cleared up right from the lead sentence. Seraphimblade Talk to me 03:53, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: What is awkward and unencyclopaedic about "Proactiv is a registered trademark of Guthy-Renker"? SarahSV (talk) 04:19, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It's deprecated, see WP:MOSTM. Granted, it doesn't explicitly cover typing out "registered trademark", but it does deprecate use of "®" which is essentially an abbreviation for that. "X (manufactured|sold|marketed) by Y" is the standard formulation, and I think much clearer and better sounding about who is doing what. Seraphimblade Talk to me 19:34, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Trademark