Talk:Calcium Lime Rust

Chili Pepper?
I don't think chili pepper is an ingredient. Will delete reference if not heard from otherwise. Chili Pepper is not in the MSDS.Joeylawn (talk) 06:06, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Advert tone
This is not about advertising. CLR has become synonymous as a "verb" when it comes to cleaning certain stubborn household items, such as "how do you CLR a shower head?" I went online to look for instructions and I was surprised Wiki did not have an article. So I want to put in an article about it and how to do that. Bledsoe2coates (talk) 07:50, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
 * These are two of the sentences which concern me: "Its fast acting, powerful formula does not require rubbing nor scrubbing. Lastly, CLR is septic safe and contains no phosphates.". That quite clearly points to advertising. Also, you have no neutral point-of-view references, the only reference you have is a product web site. Additionally, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, meaning that instructions for cleaning shower heads have no place here. Peasantwarrior (talk) 08:19, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy deletion declined. However, I did remove the sentnce mentioned by Peasantwarrior, and tagged the page with a notability tag. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:35, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Proposed deletion tag introduced. Peasantwarrior (talk) 08:53, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Why is the modifier "stubborn" needed? I think it would be better, less ad-like without. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.173.198.78 (talk) 23:09, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Deletion
If I had to choose, I would lean towards delete, and I suspect this article would be successfully deleted if formally submitted to AfD. While products are not exempt from being culturally significant, I sincerely doubt there's any potential with this one. I don't think being written like a manual or advertisement is the reason for deletion here (we can clean those problems up pretty easily), I think it's the problem of notability. Yeah, it's been around for a while and it's successful, but there's countless products on the market that could say the same. A product article needs to be about something that has a cultural impact like Coke, had a controversy like Odwalla's E. Coli breakout, etc. TheBilly (talk) 14:11, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The product may not have "cultural significance", but I don't think that should be the only reason to include it. As a rather extreme counterpoint, consider adenosine triphosphate - a chemical which drives almost all cellular processes but which has practically zero impact on culture. While CLR is clearly not as significant as ATP, my point still stands - Wikipedia is an information repository, not merely an index of modern culture. I came to this article in search of the sort of accurate chemical information I have come to expect from Wikipedia, and was sorry to see that it was lacking. This article should provide a summary of the usage of the product (as it does, although it sounds like an advertisement), as well as a list of ingredients (if available), their method of action, the hazards the product poses, and a discussion of any controversy that may exist regarding its efficacy or environmental impact. As it stands, this article is clearly useless, but I would rather see it expanded than deleted. --Barefootmatt (talk) 00:57, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Agreed, I came to this article because I was curious as to what CLR actually was. Ingredients and pointers to their effects are apropos to an encyclopedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.5.187.62 (talk) 10:41, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

snark
whats this eco-terrorist shit thats up now on the page?

more info pls
Why no discussion of CLR's properties asa a general cleaner?

People are getting fragance sensitive. Is CLR fragance free?

LMIrwin53LMIrwin53 (talk) 06:06, 30 April 2011 (UTC)