Talk:Aspen Pharmacare

Untitled
''For completeness' sake, the below text is copied verbatim from User_talk:Kuru
 * Hi Kuru, thanks for creating Aspen Pharmacare, u did me & wikipedia a huge favour with the company research! Being a pharmacist myself, I missed some detail you kindly included :) User_talk:Aliwal2012 07:39, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'm afraid to say, we walked into a trap with this ASPEN article's "parent company"; it seems not to be "ASPEN Pharmacare", since they don't mfr scheduled medicine (iow prescription drugs), only consumer items like Prep and Brylcreme! My money will be on ASPEN Pharma (holding company) User_talk:Aliwal2012 10:49, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

What will the best name be for this article (the correct company name)? User_talk:Aliwal2012 15:38, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * It should be the WP:COMMONNAME - I think it's probably OK as it is.  Ron h jones (Talk) 20:36, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Si, that was the question I attempted to pose on your talk page; what is the common name for the company? I've guessed at it from the sources and press releases, but if the common name is something a little different, then it is trivial to move the article.  Our articles are seldom named by the "formal" description of the company - simply by what is in popular use.  Kuru   (talk)  14:49, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Aspen Pharmacare is a "daughter company" or subsidary in the ASPEN Pharma (group)!
 * It will be incorrect to state: Aspen Pharmacare is a large pharmaceutical (drug) company, as that title should be reserved for ASPEN Pharma, being the sole manufacturer of their prescription drugs. Aliwal2012 (talk) 17:50, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Apology, on taking a third glance at the website logo, as well as product packaging, the name surely is displayed as Aspen Pharmacare Aliwal2012 (talk) 18:09, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
 * After careful reconsideration, I finally resolve to stay with Aspen Pharmacare Aliwal2012 (talk) 10:02, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

NPOV
Just passing through today and saw this article for the first time. I had never heard of Aspen before, so as a visitor my perspective is pretty neutral. I'd like to comment that the article appears to be mainly a hit piece against the company. A quick look at the statistics: the first ~100 words are basically neutral. The rest is negative. About 400 words of this ~500-word article are negative. Put another way, the article is 80% negative. I'm not saying anybody needs to remove the negative material, but I would suggest somebody with a little editing time could help balance this article's viewpoint by adding positive information (about 400 words?) Generally there are both good and bad aspects of any major company, so there must be more to write about this one that's positive. Drug companies, in particular, tend to do some good things for some people who use their products. Even if it is expensive for consumers (or at least expensive for consumers' health insurance companies) it's safe to guess a few people's lives were lengthened, or their quality-of-life was improved in connection with the company's products. Even overpriced drugs have some associated success stories, so it should be possible to dig up a little positive press about Aspen that would resource positive edits and improve the article. IMHO, that's all. 49.228.236.6 (talk) 03:42, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

POV section tag; March 2023
Heading is no longer a neologism, but I see a lot of facts without context or followup; and while the later paragraphs seem to have corporation's perspective, the first few not so much. New research would fix things. 195.165.204.37 (talk) 02:50, 27 March 2023 (UTC)