Talk:Artistry (cosmetics)/Archives/2015
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
Absoltely no independent evidence
Clearly, this is a blatant attempt by Quixtar to exploit Wikipedia to market it's own brand names. There is absoltely no independent evidence or references, and terms like "breakthroughs" "unique claims" and "NAO's imagery is younger, daring, and more fantasious than Artistry" has absolutely no substantiation in fact, and does not follow Wikipedia's NPOV standards.
- Yes, Requires rewriting, I will do so. --Insider201283 23:18, 25 December 2006 (UTC)