The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
SPEEDY KEEP as current medical practice is widely covered by Ayurveda. If the article seems promotional then remove then promotional content. Why delete? The article's sources might not be great but a simple Google and Google news search gives us enough coverage. Twinkle1990 (talk) 14:53, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WP:TNT DELETE The slapdash fashion in which the (not always pertinent) references are used tells me that this was created for pay. But, that's not proof.
The sources all seem to be either the company's words,[1][2]promo,[3]routine coverage,[4] gushing, sycophantic "articles", based entirely on interviews with the company's principals,[5][6][7][8][9][10],purely promotional "articles"[11][2][12] or complete nothingburgers that support nothing[13][14][15]
Her education is only vaguely described ("Biotech[?!], Marketing, University of Delhi, Stanford"--they could be "certificates") and the "family lore" which gave rise to the company is, of course, sourced to Jain (but do we need to hear about it?). Better sources are needed, and non-promotional information needs to be mined from them, not ignored. As for sourcing, Indian journalism appears to take the advertorial to unimagined new heights. Having to wade through sentences like "At Biotique, hybrid[clarification needed] plant and plant extracts are combined with biotechnology[how?] to produce highly effective[citation needed] products."[5] OK, we are dealing with the marketing of snake oil here, but what kind of article can be written when all the journalistic sources are controlled by the company, which mostly spouts bullshit? Ignore the product and focus on the marketing? (they've teamed with Disney to sell stuff for kids)[8] It's not entirely clear how this firm manages to combine Ayurveda with "biotechnology". But they do make lots of money. Edit: just had to share another gem:"She orchestrates a team of qualified Ayurvedic Doctors, Scientists and Swiss Cosmetologists who design, manufacture and pack all Biotique products."[5] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quisqualis (talk • contribs)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Linguist111 (talk) 20:56, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete it's all puffy words, and sourced to PR pieces. nothing I see for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 02:41, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Article fails GNG and NCORP. Sources do not meet SIGCOV from RS. // Timothy :: talk 00:10, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: This brand is serving India since 1992, it's very known and popular in today's generation. Subject meets WP:GNG and N:CORP. Accepts nominator's view that the article have a promotional tone, but it could be fixed. Sahilrazvii999 (talk) 05:35, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Lets examine the first block of references:
Ref 2 Nanocosmeceuticals: Innovation, Application, and Safety. Academic Press. Doesn't have a page number which sloppy editing, but it is passing mention. Page 472
Ref 3 [2] Interview with the founder. Fails WP:ORGIND.
It seems that you have not understood the meaning of WP:REFBOMB. Please refer to the first sentence: "A common form of citation overkill is loading up an article with sources without regard as to whether they support substantive or noteworthy content about the topic. This may boost the number of footnotes and create a superficial appearance of notability, which can obscure a lack of substantive, reliable, and relevant information." Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 07:56, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The page is promotional, have founder's primary interviews, need significant coverage in reliable secondary sources to pass WP:CORPDEPTH. M.Ashraf333 (talk) 05:39, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I'm adding my feedback after amending the article. Subject encounters WP:NCORP. Google provides a wealth of news. Of course, that does not imply that everything should be added here. POTLY (talk) 11:17, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Isihu. No new sources were added to the article, therefore I don't think that this is a case of WP:HEY. MrsSnoozyTurtle 06:37, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I am sympathetic to the hard-working PR department, but this company needs to be held to the same notability standards as everybody else. There are no good sources. BruceThomson (talk) 05:39, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The WP:ORGCRIT section of the WP:NCORP policy includes The guideline, among other things, is meant to address some of the common issues with abusing Wikipedia for advertising and promotion. This is more than an issue of tone, it is about the Wikipedia is not a means of promotion policy. So we assess sources according to the WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:ORGIND sections of the WP:NCORP guideline to help us determine what is a promotional article that should be deleted. For this article, WP:GOOGLEHITS are not enough to support notability, and we need to look closely at the available sources. The sources added by Misterrrrr above do not appear to add support for notability:
Biotique’s Vinita Jain: The Art of Blending Ancient Science with Modern Biotechnology (Knowledge at Wharton, 2010) - this is a Q&A interview with the founder, without any secondary commentary or critical coverage from the source or interviewer (who is not named), and is introduced "According to Jain", "Jain talks about", "She explains", and "Jain says", so this is not WP:ORGIND because she is related to the company, and produces a narrative that is then copied, regurgitated, and published in whole or in part by independent parties.
Views from the Top: Vinita Jain, CMD, Biotique (Economic Times, 2010) - this is a brief Q&A interview with a 2-sentence introduction, and she talks about her inspiration, her definition of an entrepreneur, her business mantra, her short list of advice to startups, etc, but this is neither WP:CORPDEPTH about the company nor WP:ORGIND produced by an unrelated party.
Use biotique products and get radiant, healthy skin (Google Translated) (Maharashtra Times, 2021) - this source begins with a general overview about the importance of skin care, and then moves on to descriptions and Amazon purchase links for several Boutique products. This is trivial coverage of a product or service offering instead of significant coverage of the company and appears to be native advertising.
GREEN AND VALUE BASED BUSINESS ECO-SYSTEM : Research Perspective (Vikrant Institute of Management, 2021) - the company is mentioned at p. 40 in a chapter discussing survey results related to cosmetics buying habits ("the most used brand is Biotique"), but this is a study of people, not the company, and does not include WP:CORPDEPTH.
This 27-year-old Brand Has Established Itself without Any Traditional Advertising (Entrepreneur India, 2019), this brief source is based on "[Ishaan] Jain boasts" and "he said" for the claim in the headline, as well as "he does admit" and "Jain stated" for other content, and the source includes a focus on his mother, the founder of the company. This also appears to be a narrative produced by a related party that does not pass WP:ORGIND, and the superficial coverage of the company history is limited WP:CORPDEPTH.
The Queen Of Herbs Vinita Jain, founder of Biotique & Inspiring Indian woman Entrepreneur (Sugermint, no date?) - this website describes itself as "Sugermint is India's fastest-growing digital marketing platform for Indian entrepreneurs." This is not an independent and reliable source we can use to support notability for the company. This is a superficial puff piece about Jain and the company.
And as noted above by Scope creep, the mention of the company in a chart on one page of a source on GBooks is not WP:CORPDEPTH.
Based on the source analyses in this discussion and the guidelines and policies, delete seems appropriate at this time, due to insufficient support for notability. Beccaynr (talk) 03:35, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, will look into and try to make no mistakes in future. But, as i understood and read the Content, it seems to be good. Well, i quoted my View about it. Experienced editor may understand a new editor. Thanks --- Misterrrrr (talk) 04:24, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for finding that, @Epcc12345. It's a thinly-disguised advert for Biotique, aimed at the Nigerian market:
A Nigerian skincare expert , Mrs Rosemary has urged Nigerians to use naturally formulated creams and Ayurvedic products like Biotique, Dabur, Visha Skincare, Himalayan Organics and Wander Beauty to avoid skin burns which are usually associated with "harsh unnatural creams".
More Findings about India based Biotique says that it has an operational footprint in more than 10 countries.
The firm is a women-led, self-sufficient biobased product company founded by Vinita Jain.
According to publications sources from economic times India. The beauty company was founded in 1992. Basically, Biotique is a unique blend of the 5,000-year-old science of Ayurveda with 21st century biotechnology. So in that sense Biotique is a global brand because it combines East and the West, the ancient and the modern and brings to you a platform for total health, well-being and beauty.
Wishing you "total health, well-being and beauty."-- Quisqualis (talk) 19:08, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
QuisqualisThank you for the regards. It was written from NPOV not an advert because when I made further findings the said expert Rosemary Kama is not related to biotique but only giving general advice like see this 6 months publications [29] it a related publications but from another dimension.Also This is her firm website [30] to prove the said expert doesn't have an affiliation with biotique but only rendering her view which makes that reference to pass WP:CORPDEPTH and not a publicity for nigeria market from your assumption.Thanks.Epcc12345 (talk) 13:21, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please forgive me for chuckling, @Epcc12345, but medical claims by non-experts are not at issue here. See WP:MEDRS. What Kama says is unsourced and would be regarded as complete nonsensical fluff by scientists. You'd do best to ignore it. Sometimes one has to listen to the voice of common sense and not consume the Kool-Aid.-- Quisqualis (talk) 18:02, 29 January 2023 (UTC)EDIT: What Kama is saying is that some chemical skin-lighteners can be dangerous, and Ayurveda should be used instead. However, there is no scientific evidence that Ayurvedic skin lighteners are safe an effective, though, for most people, their use has fewer dangers. Kama is either duped or paid by manufacturers, as are the majority of beauty "experts". Even the purveyors of Ayurvedic skin lighteners avoid touting the effectiveness of their products, instead focusing on vague promises including youth, brightness, clearness, "tone". Biotique sells a "brightening" cream containing "Key Ingredients: Pure extracts of milk protein, wheatgerm, almond oil, honey and seaweed" which I believe was once offered as a whitening cream. Do you think it can change the color of a person's epidermis? I don't. Quinine is South American, so not Ayurvedic, but it has a long track record as a topical skin whitener, despite not being entirely safe. Just because snake oil is written about by snake oil salesmen doesn't make their claims in depth and reliable. Biotique is a corporation which is very marketing-oriented, but nobody writes about their clever marketing. They credulously repeat what the marketing says.--Quisqualis (talk) 19:20, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The article fails notability criteria for WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH, and the article is basically WP:PROMO and WP:ADMASQ that may be a case of UPE. The citations seem like PR placement. Netherzone (talk) 00:04, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.