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.

The result was delete as failing WP:RS, and therefore failing both WP:V and WP:N. ···日本穣^? · Talk to Nihonjoe 21:47, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Veritee (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

This is just advertising for a non-notable product. The first reference says nothing about Veritee. The second does not appear to be reliable, making the dubious claim that Veritee "slows aging". These references do not suggest that the article meets notability criteria at WP:N which requires significant coverage in reliable sources where the sources address the subject directly in detail. This appears to be the third deletion debate for this topic, with the result being delete the last two. Deli nk (talk) 00:43, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Totally inacurate your comments, where are you from ? this article provides two references from the 20 minute news paper the largest news paper in Switzerland in circulation and also provides a reference from market magazine the swiss magazine for economics and finance (the pdf is the menu for the magazine with clear reference for the Veritee article available in the print version) the product is very popular in europe and switzerland where it is the number one wellness drink. thank you for your understanding and for taking good note and good contribution to wikipedia..--Netquantum (talk) 10:34, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm from Hawaii originally. Thanks for asking. Deli nk (talk) 14:56, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

if your are from Hawaii then you obviously dont know all those names in switzerland. --Netquantum (talk) 15:34, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

… which is a basic principle underlying our verifiability policy. Xe doesn't have to know. You have to supply proper sources using which xe, and any other editor or reader, can check the accuracy of what you claim. Uncle G (talk) 05:14, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

this is what we did provided references from the largest papers in switzerland in circulation (that was the point Deli doesnt know how to evaluate the sources!, we have more than 10 references for the article and one can find more than 100 references on the net. --Netquantum (talk) 20:21, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Similar advertisement-articles have been deleted twice in the past by AFD. Two refs are presented this time: the first links only to a table of contents and has none of the text. The second reads like it is based on a press release. Does not appear to satisfy notability at this point. The previous AFDs were full of Keep !votes from single purpose accounts. Edison (talk) 14:38, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment There appears to be a concerted effort to promote Veritee on Wikipedia since at least 2005 including a claim that "we are woRking on a project to inform the general public about VERITEE WELLNESS DRINK". A number of incarnations of this advertising have been repeatedly deleted including Veritee, Veritee ® Wellness, VERITEE, and probably others. There is also this draft version in userspace: User:Baltusbaltus/sandbox. The title Veritee was protected from creation for a short while, too, in an apparent attempt to stop it. This also seems to be related to the repeatedly deleted article Patrick Buri (see now-blanked AFD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patrick Buri), an individual that is being promoted by the creater of the current version of Veritee.[1] Deli nk (talk) 14:56, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Do Not delete its not really important what happened in the past at this point this article seems interesting with good references. here i just added five other references. One can find more than 100 ref on the internet!!
  We decided to remove the block after disscussion with jimfbleak (who initially implemented the block but then decided to remove it based on the new references), he removed the block and we want this.
  if you remove veritee then you have to remove all other products in europe and switzerland (rivella, enviga, etc) because Veritee is everywhere in switzerland and a very notable product. --Netquantum (talk) 15:15, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Prove it. Cite proper independent reliable sources that document this subject in depth. The two one-sentence mentions-in-passing, one advertisement, and one on-line supermarket shopping page that you've added as purported references don't cut the mustard. And no, the status of this product as a subject has no relevance to the status of any other article on some other unrelated subject. Uncle G (talk) 05:14, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Uncertain The article previously deleted at AfD was impossibly bad; this one might even be acceptable. It would be very useful to have a reference that did not seem to be derived from press releases--the likely best of them, in the "Market" newsletter, is not actually visible at the site listed: can anyone confirm the actual contents? . . DGG (talk) 04:55, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

the market magazine pdf is a menu where one can see the veritee article on the innovation section! the full article is in the print version i have seen it! send and email to the editorial maybe they will send you the electronic version or confirm the news! I suggest that we all agree on a the article and references and then post the revised article..

--Netquantum (talk) 10:56, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment In contrast to suggestions that Europeans would know that this is notable, the German (w:de:Veritee) and French (w:fr:Veritee) versions of this article have also been deleted multiple times each. Deli nk (talk) 14:58, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment why dont you devellop a good article for this notable product one can find more than 100 references on the internet and we disscusses with several editors and we decided to post the article again. you are a student and you have to learn and accept that we would like this article and dont accept that you repetedly vandalise the pages--Netquantum (talk) 15:18, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is ridiculous. Referring to any edit that I have made to this page (or any other) as vandalism is highly inappropriate. I have a made a polite, rational argument for deletion, citing Wikipedia's policies. You disagree. That's fine. But referring to anything I have done as vandalism is just insulting. Deli nk (talk) 21:28, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

the classic teminology for people who repetedly delete text without listening other comments.

--Netquantum (talk) 07:32, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

please stop vandalism, the issue is that in the past those article have been removed because of the lac of references but now we have more than 10 references and one can find many more on the internet. once we have a good article in the english version of wikipedia then the french and the germand version will follow and local editors will proceed.! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Netquantum (talk • contribs) 15:12, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I unprotected this topic to allow what appeared to be a bona fide attempt at recreation. I also helped with the formatting and allowed recreation because I wasn't sure that it met the CSD criteria. I thought it was likely to end up here, but because of my involvement, I won't vote either to keep or delete. Netquantum has asked me to close the AfD with a positive outcome, but I can't see that that is justified, and an uninvolved admin should make the judgement of when a consensus has been reached either way. jimfbleak (talk) 15:44, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• keep i like Veritee and the article looks good and provides references in line with wikipedia's policy.--89.194.134.121 (talk) 17:58, 22 June 2009 (UTC) This template must be substituted.[reply]
• keep the article looks good--Sneess (talk) 21:16, 22 June 2009 (UTC) This template must be substituted.[reply]
• Question: Can you buy this product at Migros? Stifle (talk) 13:26, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  Hi, I just made research about Migros and yes seems the product is available at Migros: have a look here on the online sales platform at Migros http://www.leshop.ch , also i know that the product is available at Manor the leading food store in switzerland and also one can find this at Sun Store the largest drug / pharma store in Switzerland... I have seen it in London at Harrods! --Netquantum (talk) 14:50, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  Keep. I think any product stocked by Migros and other similar stores, or at least the manufacturer thereof, is, prima facie, notable. Stifle (talk) 15:44, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Delete This product seems as though it may be marginally notable... however, at least one of the references is totally useless from what I can tell ([2] only mentions it in a table of contents?), and most of the other references read very much like advertisements rather than reliable news sources. Additionally, the article's content is incredibly promotional, to the point I would have considered speedy deleting this had I come across it on new page patrol. This article needs a lot of work in order to bring it up to acceptable standard for Wikipedia, but considering the apparent single-mindedness of the author, I doubt that the work will be completed acceptably. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:04, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• seems obvious that Hersfold is connected and know Deli and starting an unfounded feud here , please read the comments and then you will understand that the product is notable and usefull as a reference. we like students on wikipedia but we dont want inexperienced students who ultimately fool around here with non sense. thanks for your understanding --Netquantum (talk) 16:10, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hersfold is an administrator and knows a damned sight more about Wikipedia than you do. Take his advice, understand his comments, he's a respected voice here - one of the top half a percent of editors. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 16:14, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

in this case seems that Hersfold did not read the comments and does not understand the meaning and purpose of the market mag reference. what about the comments from Stifle this is good comments!!!! thank you for your understanding and good contribution at wikipedia.--Netquantum (talk) 16:17, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I respect Stifle's opinion here, however in my assessment of the article I came up with a different conclusion. I do apologize for misinterpreting the one reference, however that doesn't change much, as I'm not able to verify that source and none of the other sources in my opinion are usable. Please remember to assume good faith of other users; I'm human as well, and do occasionally make mistakes. Your comments previously are quite accusatory. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:35, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Nothing more than an advert and spam, and the product is only marginally notable. Being sold in a store does not express notability. The article, if kept, needs a lot of work lest it be speedy deleted, and given the stubborn nature of Netquantum, I doubt that he would be willing to engage in these edits. seicer | talk | contribs 16:20, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

if you want to delete an article with several references including articles from the largest papers in switzerland in circulation (20 minutes) then seems that something is wrong I am waiting and will not oppose a good inteligent rewrite of the article so go for it if you know something about this subject.! thks--Netquantum (talk) 16:27, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• comment:: botom line is that the article provides several references from the largest papers in switzerland, we disscussed with several editors including jimfbleak and aggreed on the revised version, we also know that the product is on sale at the largest stores in Europe including migros and manor! what is required now is common sense!--Netquantum (talk) 16:31, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Insufficient notability to meet guidelines. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:02, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - The article itself uses words like 'Wellness' (which means what exactly?) and the fact that a drink (which contains water) has vitamins and minerals in it is no special claim. I can only see 2 of the sources (the third one comes up with a loading error) the first article seems to be an advertisement in itself, saying that the drink acts as a 'preventative drug' without actually citing any scientific studies or saying why the drink qualifies as medication. The second source only mentions the product in the table of contents (as has been said previously). This doesn't meet notability until better sources can be provided. Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 18:07, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comments the article uses the word "wellness" because the name of the product is "veritee wellness drink".

again the article is notable because we know that the product is available retail at the major super markets in europe and we have references from the largest papers in switzerland ! what more do you need for notability than reviews and articles in the largest papers.....thks for your understanding.!!!--Netquantum (talk) 18:14, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

hi you dont know what wellness means, and you are on wikipedia, type wellness and you will find out what it means.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wellness_(alternative_medicine) --Netquantum (talk) 18:41, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comments why dont we remove all products and product references on wikipedia. if we have to delete the Veritee article then we also have to delete "Enviga" "Rivella" " Red Bull" "Nestea" " Glaceau" etc.

I have spend a lot of time to ad this product article and would appreciate respect and common sense for a very notable product that is available retail al over switzerland and europe and provides references from the largest papers in switzerland !!!!!!!!

--Netquantum (talk) 18:25, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete as recreation of deleted material and an admin may want to take a close look at Netquantum who just made pointy vandalistic edits to numerous other drink company articles. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 18:38, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever kind of deletion is done I think salt should be added to the mineral water. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:52, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can I second that? Netquantum seems to think Red Bull, Nestea, Rivella and Enviga are all advertising on wikipdia but Veritee isnt! Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 18:58, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, perhaps it's just a frustrated editor. Best to show patience and understanding. I'm retracting my request for salt. It's not a good salve for wounds. ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:32, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep – Article has been cleaned up with most of the spam removed; a minimal amount of notability has been established. I would recommend that some watch this article, however, so this article does not float back to the same problems as before in regards with spam. MuZemike 18:58, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak delete The sources in this article would never stand up for the claims they're making. I'm pretty confident there isn't even an appropriate indication of notability (per WP:N or WP:PRODUCT) across the two accessible sources currently in the article. Yeah, not a particularly great reason to delete, but the underlying vanispamcruftisement concerns push me over the edge. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 19:48, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

prove it because you are totally wrong, i created the article because i use the product on a regular basis!!! and made some research about it and it helps my condition and promotes my health.--Netquantum (talk) 19:59, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• delete I can't find sources leading me to think that this meets WP:N or WP:PRODUCT. JoshuaZ (talk) 19:54, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

please read the disscussion and you will find out that the product has more than 10 references from leading news papers and magazines in switzerland including 20 minutes the largest news paper in circulation, we have more references here then most articles in wikipedia. we also know that the product sells with leading stores in switzerland and europe--Netquantum (talk) 19:59, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you point to something that isn't a regurgitated press release? JoshuaZ (talk) 20:04, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WHAT A DAY!!!! i looked at the 20 minute article and at the Extanssion magazine article and the content is totally different so obviously not comming from the same source, also if you look at this article it gives you references and info about the case but from a different perspective:

Eau Taillefine : ultime sursis pour un symbole

http://www.bloob.fr/la-presse-en-parle/eau-taillefine-ultime-sursis-pour-un-symbole-5087.html 

--Netquantum (talk) 20:10, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Um, forgive me, but this article only mentions Veritee once towards the end. JoshuaZ (talk) 20:16, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

yes but this link shows you the different opinions and perspectives about this product and not based on a press release as you claim... Also, I am in Europe and in the print press one can see many more comments about this product, the other day i sow and article in Lematin explained that the product is chemical and the taste horible ( i dont agree but this shows you that all sorts of articles are arising and not based on press releases.--Netquantum (talk) 20:22, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gentlemens i spend all day here and now i have to go and will be back tommorow, please understand that this article is good and not the only article i have done in the past and therefore i hope that all the time, research and work here will be usefull. for sure if we delete Veritee we have to delete many more products articles on wikipedia.

--Netquantum (talk) 20:22, 23 June 2009 (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.