Talk:The Body Shop/Archives/2019
 | This is an archive of past discussions about The Body Shop. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Impartiality of tone
This article has some genuinely good material, but some sections are not the most impartial, and quality here is kinda wobbly in places. For instance:
- some poorly-added citations - just plain broken formatting, and overuse on one sentence in the Community Trade section
- tone that would lend itself real nicely to a press release - perhaps submit this to the company itself and don't add it to Wikipedia
- a long, fluffy social activism section that's a bit too encyclopedic in tone and content
- an oddly tabled 'International expansion' section that could honestly just be written, not a table, or pieced off into separate existing sections, tbh
- a 'Products' section that's just. it's just advertising, honestly, this section is just advertising. The accompanying picture is nice, but in the context of being next to this section, it's a little 'hey come buy from us'
- the 'Controversies' section is chunky and needs re-writing
I've re-written the 'History' section already, but it needs more citations, too. I implore whoever's following this article to please go back, whenever you've got the time, and look through all the sources used - two of the ones in the old 'Origins' section were dead and useless, and another was just a sycophantic obituary I think I got diabetes from looking at for too long.
Have a look and decide just how good they are, and whether they're quality enough to be included here. We are the first site people come to when they want to learn about a thing: at the minute, we're just giving off wonky info. This article could be great! It just needs some TLC. --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 23:15, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
article really needs more citations
This article contains many un-cited statements.
Wikipedia's verifiability policy (WP:VERIFY) states:
- Readers must be able to check that any of the information within Wikipedia articles is not just made up. This means all material must be attributable to reliable, published sources. Additionally, quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be supported by inline citations.
- 2804:14D:5C59:8300:0:0:0:1000 (talk) 02:37, 30 June 2019 (UTC)