This article was nominated for deletion on October 18, 2005. The result of the discussion was Keep.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Business This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Jacksonville ( inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jacksonville, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.JacksonvilleWikipedia:WikiProject JacksonvilleTemplate:WikiProject JacksonvilleJacksonville articles Brands Stub‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles Stub This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Medicine: Ophthalmology Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Ophthalmology task force (assessed as Low-importance).

This article needs some major revision. I work for Johnson & Johnson Vision Care Inc. (formerly Vistakon), but I can't tell if this article is about the company or the product. Most of the information is dated, bordering on obsolete. I would recommend the creation of a Johnson & Johnson Vision Care Inc. article with subpages for the various products.

PaulNeb86 ( talk) 13:54, 15 August 2016 (UTC) reply

It would be nice if someone "in the know" would add an explanation of what the differences are between the different Acuvue sub-brands. From a consumer perspective, what are each good for? Why would one choose Acuvue Advance or Acuvue Oasys over Acuvue, for example. -- Srleffler 22:01, 18 October 2005 (UTC) reply

• Although the wording could be better, I tried to help out the article with a bit more information regarding these things. AED 23:15, 18 October 2005 (UTC) reply

I have added some info on brands and will add more consumer information when I get time —Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.104.158.102 ( talk) 16:59, 30 January 2011 (UTC) reply

The section on the Limerick plant has no citations and reads like a brochure... probably should be deleted, no? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmcdon10 ( talk • contribs) 05:30, 29 May 2012 (UTC) reply

I agree; seems like there is bias throughout that entire section. ( J.gastaldello ( talk) 03:50, 10 April 2013 (UTC)) reply

I removed it. Wpegden ( talk) 20:56, 6 May 2013 (UTC) reply

The History section is unreferenced, it shows no proof that the infomration is correct or verified. Flagged the section as needing more citations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisrokz ( talk • contribs) 09:25, 11 September 2020 (UTC) reply