Talk:Moroccanoil

Proposed deletion
Or-Shalem has proposed to delete the article, based on the following complaint:

"This article aggressively leads with it being an Israeli company based in Te Acuv, when the sources don't explicitly mention Tel Aviv. A basic web crawling search doesn't reveal that the company is Israeli, and all the sources cited were created within the past few weeks, despite Moroccanoil having sponsored Eurovision got over four years. It comes across as very sketchy and politically driven to me, given the nature of Eurovision this year. Frankly, I don't think there are enough sources for this article and I don't think the sources that do exist are provide enough information to directly trace the company to Israel, since the company itself isn't making this claim."

I am removing the deletion notice, since: 20WattSphere (talk) 10:32, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Most Wikipedia pages begin with the nationality of the entity described. As such, it is not problematic that Israel is mentioned, given that is where the company is located (according to all sources available)
 * The date of the sources does not appear to violate any Wikipedia policy.
 * If anything in the article is politically biased, we should remove it. However, if anything, the political debates around Eurovision this year increase the notability of the subject, rather than suggest deleting the article.
 * The company itself may not have publicly claimed to be Israeli, but the co-founder has given several interviews that establish this fact, including on CNN. If you find any information that draws this into question, users can add it to the article.


 * I have expanded the article with sources clearly mentioning that the company is Israeli. In any case, the full legal name as stated on their website is self-evident. ~  Ivan Scrooge 98  ( talk ) 20:22, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Many thanks, the article looks much better now!
 * Regarding the headquarters being in NY - is there any solid information on that? There are at least 2 different companies that are part of the business - Moroccanoil Inc., which is US based, and Moroccanoil Israel Ltd. Is there actually any source describing the relationship between them?
 * 20WattSphere (talk) 09:06, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Yeah the info’s a bit scattered around but as far as I can tell Moroccanoil Inc. is the US subsidiary of Moroccanoil Israel Ltd. See the link above and here for instance. I will see if I can find more explicit sources in this regard. ~  Ivan Scrooge 98  ( talk ) 09:38, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Found this document in German, Dutch and French among others (could not find in English) where it is explicitly stated that the parent company is Moroccanoil Israel, Ltd.:, , . ~  Ivan Scrooge 98  ( talk ) 12:02, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Good find! So I guess my next question is how can the HQ be in the US if the US branch is not the parent company? Maybe there's a way for that to happen, I'm not sure. 20WattSphere (talk) 06:59, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Yeah unfortunately I’m not an expert either. I guess the general headquarters were moved there after the company expanded but the hierarchy was retained. ~  Ivan Scrooge 98  ( talk ) 09:25, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
 * You can say the company was founded in Israel in the opener if you want (that's what the sources say), but you can't call it an "Israeli" company given what the sources are saying. This is not a change I am going to make because it is redundant with the information below it (eg founded in Tel Aviv by Chilean-Israelim).
 * A company called "Moroccanoil Israel Ltd." is essentially meaningless in terms of geographic identification and I would consider this source to be dubious at best for Wikipedian standards, not in that it is doubtful but rather because it is not a secondary/tertiary source in the form of an article.
 * Sorry you don't like how it doesn't suit your narrative, but following the rhetoric of the sources is important. Or-Shalem (talk) 04:22, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Or-Shalem - please refrain from making more changes before achieving consensus.
 * There are more sources that say it is Israeli than that its HQ is in the US. On the former claim, the media routinely refer to it as Israeli, a media source said production is mostly in Israel, the products themselves state "Made in Israel", a Jewish expression is included at the top right of all products, and the legal documentation Ivan found says Moroccanoil Israel Ltd. is the parent company. So, there's quite a bit there, and we would need some reasonable evidence to contradict this.
 * The sources making the NYC HQ claim include LinkedIn (which is not reliable as per RS) and Craft.co, which appears to be a free company information aggregator. Honestly it wouldn't surprise me if Craft.co got this information from LinkedIn. So, the evidence for HQ being in NYC is sketchy at best.
 * I would be more comfortable with removing the HQ info than the nationality, since there is less evidence for that. I'm certainly not comfortable using our limited evidence on HQ location to overrule everything else.
 * Side note - the Salon Magazine source suggests it was founded in Montreal, so that's probably another thing we should double check.
 * One option for the article would be to specify that many of these things are disputed and not disclosed. But I think we should continue googling and researching to find stronger evidence before resorting to that re-write.
 * Or-Shalem, please don't edit the article again unless it's constructive and you've engaged on the talk page first. 20WattSphere (talk) 08:03, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Just to add - I'm not a corporate lawyer but I'm sure there are also ways for a company to be HQed in a different country than it is incorporated. So I don't know that what the article currently states is necessarily wrong, but other users might. 20WattSphere (talk) 08:13, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing out LinkedIn is not considered a reliable source, I will try to look into it. Even though that is the company’s official profile so I find this policy a bit weird, I have to be honest. ~  Ivan Scrooge 98  ( talk ) 09:44, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * You're the one defending a contentious edit. I don't think you understand that makes you the one who's warring by wikipedia policy.
 * We can resolve this here in the talk page, so you shouldn't make any more edits until we've resolved this here.
 * I'm telling you now, the article will NOT be opening with it being called an "Israei company." It's just not going to happen and you have to accept it. It's clearly politically motivated rhetoric, and if you don't like it, well that's just too bad. Or-Shalem (talk) 18:51, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * there’s nothing contentious about sourced content. Please bring refs that claim a different nationality or stop edit warring. ~  Ivan Scrooge 98  ( talk ) 18:55, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I told you NOT to edit until we have a consensus here.
 * Just because it is "sourced" does not make it acceptable content such that someone is allowed to remove sourced contrnt if they don't feel it is a constructive edit. Ivan, you are edit warring. Stop. I will get an admin involved if you continue. You do not own this article and others are allowed to contribute to it. Or-Shalem (talk) 18:58, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * What consensus? Sources say it’s Israeli. You are the one who doesn’t like it. I’ll be glad to have an admin solve this, bring it in! ~  Ivan Scrooge 98  ( talk ) 18:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Get a admin to ip ban this fool, literally every source says it’s a Israeli company who does this imbecile think he’s fooling. AitMazigh (talk) 19:06, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Ooh insulting me and calling me a fool? The admins will like that one for sure.
 * I'm not trying to fool anyone, buddy. Nothing here is personal. I am simply making the article's rhetoric match up with what the sources are saying. "Israeli-founded" is the correct terminology. You may use that if you want.
 * Honestly it seems you people are trying to make this personal. Give it a rest . Or-Shalem (talk) 19:10, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * AitMazigh should not have insulted. That said, you seem the only one to have made the thing personal from the very beginning by assuming the bad faith of the creator. ~  Ivan Scrooge 98  ( talk ) 19:11, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I didn't say anything about "consensus." There is no consensus. There are literally three editors here.
 * The sources calling it "Israeli" are not Wikipedia acceptable and most are just speculating. The name "Morroccanoil Israel Ltd. does not necessarily mean the company is Israeli. The fact that it partially operates out of New York, and not all the members involved are even from Israel contests it being an "Israeli" company, depening on how you interpret what that means. That's the problem is that "Israeli company" is misleading because it van br interpreted in different ways that don't necessarily match what the sources are saying. Also, neither the Swedish nor the Spanish article are calling it "Israeli," despite translating it from English and that is likely intentional. Or-Shalem (talk) 19:06, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Read the sources. Please do. They call the company Israeli. It’s not something we editors claimed out of nowhere. ~  Ivan Scrooge 98  ( talk ) 19:08, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I will read the sources, but please do not edit the article until we come up with an acceptable compromise here. If you edit before I read the sources, then I will not read them. Or-Shalem (talk) 19:11, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * You are the one who edited before reading the sources. Please don’t keep twisting things around. ~  Ivan Scrooge 98  ( talk ) 19:12, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Also, as far as I have seen it is normal practice to state the nationality of companies when it is straightforward—and it is here, since no source claims it to be American or Canadian. ~  Ivan Scrooge 98  ( talk ) 19:10, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * First of all, it doesn't matter what other articles do, as the information in each article is case-by-case. Secondly not all articles even do this. It is normal when it is indisputable, and when it can't be considered subjective. When it doubt, such as in this case, it is best to leave it out. From what I've seen, it was founded in Tel
 * Aviv, but that doesn't necessarily make it an "Israeli company," because again it can be interpretted the wrong way.
 * For example Carnival Cruise Line is headquarted in Florida and founded by an Israeli and Norwegian, but it called "international" and not "American."
 * Waze is called a "subsidiary of Google" and not an "Israeli" company, because while it was founded AND operates in Israel, at this point it is part of Google, so calling it "Israeli" is misleading. Morroccanoil is ina. similar situation. It was founded by people of multiple nationalities, and operates between multiple companies. They do not outright call the company Israeli, even though it started in Tel Aviv. When people are saying it is "Israeli," it is their interpretation of the company. Or-Shalem (talk) 19:21, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * We have been telling you from the beginning that it is indisputable information, as per sources clearly stating “Israeli company”. It has nothing to do with who founded it and where. The company is referred to as Israeli. ~  Ivan Scrooge 98  ( talk ) 19:23, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * No. You are interpreting it as "indisputable." It is objectively NOT supported by the sources. Give it a rest man. Or-Shalem (talk) 19:27, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I’m done. You either did not read the sources or you are ignoring the point, which is that you can’t call its nationality disputed when nowhere is it claimed that the company is Canadian, American, or whatever. I sadly have nothing else to bring to this conversation. ~  Ivan Scrooge 98  ( talk ) 19:30, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I made the opener lead with it being founded in Tel Aviv, since you so desperately want this to paint this as an Israeli company per your agenda.
 * Can we put this to rest now, please? The article fits your narrative in a way that actually is supported by the sources. Since you don't want to actually discuss and just say "Look at the sources," as if it's actually changing my mind on the matter, I did my own resolution. Or-Shalem (talk) 19:39, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Sources actually claim the company was founded in Montreal and I had misread them. I will restore the revision per sourcing. ~  Ivan Scrooge 98  ( talk ) 19:45, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Ivan any way you can get this page protected so shalem doesn’t delete half the page and sources because his feelings are hurt. AitMazigh (talk) 19:48, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Funny. You're the ones whom's feelings appear to be hurt since you refuse to discuss with me on the talk page which I am offering to do. Or-Shalem (talk) 19:58, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Can you not see that there is limited information on the company's origin? That's why I requested the deletion in the first place. It's hardly sourceable. And the information that does exist from the sources are dubious. On the one hand you're calling out Israeli, and on the other you're saying it was founded in Montreal. It is owned by Israelis and does some manufacturing in Jerusalem. It is headquarted in New York. This does not point to it being an "Israei company." It is owned by Israelis, but that's about all you can say about and the Spanish and Swedish wikipedias don't call it Israeli for a reason (and I had nothing to do with that). Or-Shalem (talk) 20:02, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * This is a really disappointing turn of events, Or-Shalem. To be a good WP editor you need a pretty calm and collected approach. At best, you need an enquiring mind - to be proactively searching for the truth, the most faithful way to frame it in an article, and the most efficient way to collaborate with the other editors here. At the very least you need to make sure you understand WP policies before invoking them against users whom you disagree with. In all these respects, I think you have a long way to go. 20WattSphere (talk) 09:59, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

I have notified admins about the user’s misbehavior at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. ~  Ivan Scrooge 98  ( talk ) 19:53, 31 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Good. They will remind you how to acceptably source an article.
 * Your are editing to suit a narrative which goes against wikipedia guidelines Or-Shalem (talk) 19:56, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The article will not lead with "Israeli company." Whether you want it to or not, that's just how it is. Accept it. Or-Shalem (talk) 19:57, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Are you an employee for this company? Not only are you removing legitimate sources that state it is an Israeli company you are also moving down unrelated sources that are critical of this company. AitMazigh (talk) 20:06, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * At this point it’s clear they won’t listen. Let the admins do their job. ~  Ivan Scrooge 98  ( talk ) 20:08, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes. Let the admins do their job. Wait for them to look at the discussion you won't have with me before you make contentious changes to the article. At this point it doesn't matter how many articles claim the company is "Israeli," there are enough other sources that state the company is headquartered in New York, or that the company was founded in Montreal, and that one of the founders is Chilean-Canadian for it to be contentious to solely call it an "Israeli company" in the opener. It would be better to say it was founded by Israelis as that is objective and not interpreted. Why don't you wait for someone else to contribute to the discussion instead of warring? Or-Shalem (talk) 20:57, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * No I don't work for the company. And I'm not Israeli, either, as your "friend" here speculated on my talk page.
 * I am keeping the article neutral until there's a consensus on how to address national identity for the company, if any, which you won't seem to accept. Or-Shalem (talk) 21:00, 31 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Comment – the mere fact that WP:REFBOMB is being utilized in the lead sentence indicates to me that there is an attempt to add sources without regard as to whether they support substantive or noteworthy content about the topic. If it really is that noteworthy that they are indeed an Israeli company, then REFBOMB shouldn't have to be used in the lead sentence, that is citation overkill. Is the topic of this article notable for being an Israeli company or notable for being a cosmetics company? My guess is that its notability derives from being a cosmetics company. Pick one good reliable source to support Israeli company and get rid of the citation overkill. Isaidnoway (talk) 10:47, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * This was in response to the repeated deletions of the above user, who claimed that the company can’t be called Israeli. So I reworked to make it clear that the company is indeed referred to as Israeli by multiple sources. ~  Ivan Scrooge 98  ( talk ) 10:50, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * The same could be said about other brands (Head and Shoulders, Pantene, etc.) which are described as American companies. As to whether the company is Israeli, the official sources that IvanScrooge98 provided above say that it is:
 * Israel is where the parent company and the company's headquarters are. You'll also find "Moroccanoil Israel Ltd" mentioned in their material safety data sheet, which also gives their plant's address (Koren Industrial Zone, P.O.B 17, Maalot Tarshiha, 24952, Israel). It is also mentioned in the 2021 trademarks journal (Canadian intellectual properly). M.Bitton (talk) 14:53, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot, finding the location of the plant explains the “two hours north of Jerusalem” found in other articles. Pointing out where the company is registered should settle at least in part the nationality issue, even if the headquarters (where the management works) are actually located in New York. The problem of Or-Shalem’s conduct remains though. ~  Ivan Scrooge 98  ( talk ) 15:11, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * So the issue of citation overkill remains. Content disputes are meant to be resolved through discussion on the talk page, not through refbombing the lead sentence. You and have aptly demonstrated through RS that it is an Israeli company. As is stands right now, 57% of the refs used in this article are in the lead paragraph, that is ridiculous. One inline citation, two at the most, is all that is needed in the lead sentence for material that may be challenged or is likely to be challenged. The behavioral issues of another editor don't justify refbombing the lead and is a misuse of refs to prove an obvious point. Like I said, get rid of the citation overkill. Deal with the behavioral issues at the appropriate venue. Isaidnoway (talk) 16:20, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I have replaced the citation overkill in the opening with two reliable sources. ~  Ivan Scrooge 98  ( talk ) 16:20, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Looks like we both posted at exactly the same time, so ignore the parts of my comment about citation overkill. It looks much better. Thanks. Isaidnoway (talk) 16:23, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * No worries, I totally understand the problem and as I said I had only placed those in response to content removal. Some more work needs to be done for the second sentence I believe, but we’ll get to it. ~  Ivan Scrooge 98  ( talk ) 16:28, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * No worries, I totally understand the problem and as I said I had only placed those in response to content removal. Some more work needs to be done for the second sentence I believe, but we’ll get to it. ~  Ivan Scrooge 98  ( talk ) 16:28, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Eurovision sponsorship
This sentence appears to be UNDUE and an attempt to make a connection to EBU's decision when there is no solid connection:
 * The repeated refusal of the EBU to discuss the legitimacy of Israel's participation attracted scrutiny, with some outlets and social media users suggesting that the choice might be linked to Moroccanoil being the main sponsor of the event.

Yes it attracted scrutiny, but some outlets and non-notable anonymous social media users suggestions do not make this content DUE for inclusion. There is an implication here that their sponsorshp is the reason for EBU's decision, and the sources don't support that definitive conclusion. Exceptional claims require exceptional sources making that direct connection, not suggestions from some outlets and non-notable anonymous social media users. And per WP:METRO, the reliability of Metro has been compared to that of the Daily Mail and other British tabloids, so that is a crappy source as well that shouldn't be used anywhere in this article. Isaidnoway (talk) 18:17, 1 June 2024 (UTC)


 * I’m sorry, I’m not sure if I got your point. I tried from the beginning not to word the section as implying that their sponsorship “is the reason”, but simply that there has been a bit of controversy over the sponsor’s nationality. The sources I provided report the existence of the controversy and/or make claims about a possible link themselves. ~  Ivan Scrooge 98  ( talk ) 19:17, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Someone went out of their way to apply a CT Topics editnotice to this article. This section is obviously what the editnotice applies to. Vague assertions and suggestions that EBU's Israel decision is somehow related to $$$$ from Moroccanoil's sponsorship is a contentious claim. Therefore, an exceptional and contentious claim of this nature, requires exceptional sourcing, not vague assertions and suggestions. As far as we know, Moroccanoil's sponsorship of the Eurovision Song Contest has absolutely nothing to do with the A-I Conflict and there is no direct connection that reliable sources have reported that indicate the EBU's decision is directly related to Moroccanoil's $$$$. This content is UNDUE and should be removed.<b style="font-family:Times New Roman; color:blue"> Isaidnoway </b><b style="font-family:Times New Roman; color:#03B54F">(talk)</b> 20:16, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Call me stubborn, but I still don’t get it, and I mean it without hard feelings. We are not claiming anything in the article, we are reporting the existence of the controversy, which has drawn some attention to the company in the context of Israel’s war on Gaza. What would be an exceptional source, I mean, what would be a statement about the controversy that makes it worth of inclusion? You may argue that the scrutiny has been marginal, and I give this might be a reason not to include it, but what else are sources supposed to say other than “there have been allegations”? Do you mean that it is undue weight unless someone comes with actual proof or outright accusations towards Moroccanoil? ~  Ivan Scrooge 98  ( talk ) 20:36, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Are there any reliable sources reporting that Moroccanoil directly and explicitly told the EBU that if Israel was not allowed to participate in the contest, they would pull their sponsorship? If the answer is no, then this content does not belong in this article. This content has to do with the EBU and allegations surrounding them. It is UNDUE for this article to report on allegations about the EBU, when Moroccanoil had nothing whatsoever to do with the controversy.<b style="font-family:Times New Roman; color:blue"> Isaidnoway </b><b style="font-family:Times New Roman; color:#03B54F">(talk)</b> 21:07, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * The allegations do not seem to be in either direction as far as I could see (i.e. they could imply either that Moroccanoil holds the EBU on a chokehold or that the EBU does not want to lose funding, or both), but now I get where you’re coming from. ~  Ivan Scrooge 98  ( talk ) 21:21, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * No, the allegations are clearly directed at the EBU. And this subsection Eurovision sponsorship is listed under Controversies. So what exactly is controversial about this company sponsoring Eurovision Song Contest? There is nothing in those two paragraphs in that subsection to show our readers their mere sponsorship of a song contest is controversial. And there is this see also listed right under the heading:
 * So when I click through to that article, it doesn't say Moroccanoil's sponsorship is controversial, or even mention Moroccanoil at all. That 'See also' is inappropriate for this article, when there is no relation between this company and Eurovision Song Contest 2024. And like I previously stated, that last paragraph in that subsection is wildly UNDUE when there are no allegations being made against this company as having done anything wrong or controversial.<b style="font-family:Times New Roman; color:blue"> Isaidnoway </b><b style="font-family:Times New Roman; color:#03B54F">(talk)</b> 00:34, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Let’s not pretend that the reason isn’t obvious: the problem was not their sponsorship per se, but their nationality in a time of harsh controversy involving Israel and with calls for the country’s exclusion being ignored. I added the “see also” section to inform readers that this does not come out of thin air. At the same time, this seems to me the only place where to include the info for the reason you mentioned, i.e. that there aren’t specific allegations, so dealing with Moroccanoil in an article about the Israeli participation is out of place. ~  Ivan Scrooge 98  ( talk ) 09:31, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I guess we could open an WP:ARBPIA as was suggested at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. ~  Ivan Scrooge 98  ( talk ) 09:36, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Arbitration is for conduct disputes, not content disputes. I'm removing the content per UNDUE. You acknowledge that there is no problem with their sponsorship, and there are no specific allegations against this company. Readers can get the info they need about Israel and with calls for the country’s exclusion being ignored and the EBU at the appropriate articles.<b style="font-family:Times New Roman; color:blue"> Isaidnoway </b><b style="font-family:Times New Roman; color:#03B54F">(talk)</b> <b style="font-family:Times New Roman; color:blue"> Isaidnoway </b><b style="font-family:Times New Roman; color:#03B54F">(talk)</b> 05:41, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Agreed, inclusion is both not sufficiently supported by RS and undue, even ignoring Coatrack concerns. FortunateSons (talk) 19:05, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Crit section and it’s sourcing
I don’t love the sourcing in that section, WP:CRIT notwithstanding.

Ignoring the secondary due/coatrack/extraordinary claim question, what are the thoughts on the reliability of those? FortunateSons (talk) 19:11, 4 June 2024 (UTC)