Talk:Natural nasal spray

Problems
There is something about this article that is either not being explained right or which is downright fishy. It talks about "active ingredients" and also about the products being produced "in accordance with the principles of homeopathy". This seems to be directly contradictory as homoeopathic products do not contain any active ingredients.

There is also too much talk about specific products that may or may not be notable enough to mention by name.

There are general style problems. No encyclopaedia article should have a section called "conclusions".

Finally, the whole thing might be better off merged to Nasal spray, which it seems to be a POV fork of anyway. --DanielRigal (talk) 22:32, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Agreed this article just seems like someone trying to sell a product. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.237.167.158 (talk) 00:38, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. This article uses tradenames and medical language interchangeably. Given that revious discussion has suggested merging with nasal sray, i will remove what would appear to breach neutral and/or misleading POV rules and merge the two. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grammaticalpedant (talk • contribs) 12:51, 12 December 2011 (UTC)