Talk:BioViva

Ways to improve BioViva
Hi, I'm Cotton2. Deku-shrub, thanks for creating BioViva!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Bioviva....reversed HER cells... Close to advertising, peacock and violating NPOV. Please rewrite in wp:NPOV style.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Cotton2 (talk) 20:12, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Are you sure? Not sure how to fix this. The case is very unusual in that she's experimenting on herself. As a result, the language can't be honestly changed to saying 'reversed aging in cells' or similar, because she's a sample size of one. Deku-shrub (talk) 20:20, 24 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Maybe you should wait to publish this article. Wikipedia has what's called five pillars. One is that all statements need to be sourced to 3rd party reliable sources. The bigger the claim the better the source needs to be. No original work wp:nor. Just find some academic source that reports in a neutral tone. Again, help is available, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Cotton2 (talk) 23:35, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Contested deletion
I looked at the copyvios report and made some amends where it did indeed look like sentences had been copy-pasted. However as I lack a deep understanding of the tech, I justify the use of the copied quotes.

I hope this article is now in an acceptable state --Deku-shrub (talk) 19:14, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
 * You need to state it in your own words, it looks like you just moved a few words around. Sunmist3 (talk) 19:22, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I chopped out a poorly integrated segment someone else had put in. The tool now reports 48% risk - what's my target metric here? Deku-shrub (talk) 19:52, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
 * You're not looking to get it under a certain percentage, but rather remove any sections that are wholesale copying. I've gone ahead and done that, and the article is okay now from a copyright point of view. — Diannaa (talk) 04:18, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

March 2020: concerns
Dr. Kris Kooper (talk) 02:53, 11 March 2020 (UTC) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BioViva Dr. Kris Kooper (talk) 02:53, 11 March 2020 (UTC) 90% of the information on this page was written by the primary source, the CEO of BioViva. It reads like a promotion or infomercial. Once actual Wikipedia editors found the page they wrote honest material stating it’s pseudoscience, not FDA approved, etc. The page is about a Science Company run out of the primary sources home. The primary source has no scientific degrees. No M.D., No PhD, nor any advanced degree in Genetics, Biology, Chemistry, Physics or any science whatsoever. The primary source does not even have a College degree. The page reads like promotion and an infomercial, It’s advertising, peacock and violating NPOV. Then it is rebutted by Wikipedia editors. It is embarrassing with false scientific information and makes BioViva sound like an actual science company whilst Wikipedia editors quote Antonio Regalado of M.I.T., Dr. Bradley Johnson, Associate Professor of Pathology and Lab Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Timothy Caulfield, professor in the The Faculty of Law and the School of Public Health at the University of Alberta, George M Martin, professor of pathology at the University of Washington, Duncan Baird, professor of Cancer and Genetics at Cardiff University's School of Medicine whom all state BioViva and it’s unapproved FDA offshore medical tourism treatment is pseudoscience or worse. I hereby request that this page be taken down completely. It is an embarrassment to Wikipedia. DrKrisKooper moved by Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:50, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Article as now stands (11 March) incorporates criticism of the paucity of experimental results and lack of any governments' approvals of this as valid anti-aging therapy. David notMD (talk) 13:33, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

DrKrisKooper Nonsense, this does not address the fact attempted to use it as promotional material and it is still peacock, and violating NPOV. Your joke about “David NotMD” is not funny, those of us who are MD’s worked long and hard learning to help cure the ill not turn Science into a joke. This page should be removed immediately. DrKrisKooper redactions made by Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:46, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I have removed about 25% of the article's content as either misleading or not meeting WP:MEDRS. If you still believe that this article, as it stands, should not exist, then start an Articles for Deletion process. As for my chosen User name and credentials, if you had bothered to visit my User page, you would have learned that I earned a PhD in nutritional biochemistry from MIT, have published in academic journals, have been editing here for more than ten years, and before I retired, had a day job advising dietary supplement companies against making false medical claims. I agree totally that BioViva has no credible science. Yet. This does not mean there should be no Wikipedia article about the company. Information is better than no information. David notMD (talk) 12:02, 12 March 2020 (UTC)