Talk:Mode Media/Archives/2013
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Reads like an Ad
Hi, this article reads like an Ad, is too long, and takes up too much space with not-obviously-importnat details. I'll take an edit pass to try to make into a better article. --HighKing (talk) 09:40, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
- When I asked you to discuss I meant to explain, not just state. Elaborate and give examples.
- I see referenced and unbiased facts in the article. The article also has its fair share of criticism in several points:
- extensive and sourced discussion about the character of Glam (distributed media vs. ad network)
- weak business numbers that leaked
- cutting workforce and wages, delay in payments.
- What else do you want?
- The style sure can be optimized. Since I started the article and layed out its structure, I just added information step-by-step. I will overhaul some passages when I have the time.
- For now I delete the template and ask other users to join the discussion. I will assess the other edits you made which I find not all constructive. See my message on your talk page.--Peter Eisenburger (talk) 06:46, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
I tend to agree with the original writer. Examples of ad-like copy are the second and third sentences relating to the company's "vision" and "mission." Such phrases sound particularly ad-like. As does the roll-call of awards from organizations that apparently do not meet notability guidelines (or, at a minimum, have pages that are not linked)all above-the-fold. Within the text are ad-like gems such as "Glam announced the partnership as a 'new vertical media network' which the company sees itself pioneering giving media companies 'networks with all the glory and none of the headaches of building their own.'" Generally speaking, this article could be trimmed roughly in half without losing any value to the vast majority of wikipedia users.Magic1million (talk) 17:59, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Gratuitous Corporate Funding
I did my best to trim this article before fatigue set in. There is still WAY too much information about the individual funding cycles, about the company's non-notable ventures, and the like. This article is still about twice as long as it could be and riddled with advertising-speak. At any rate, I tried to get off to a good start. Magic1million (talk) 18:29, 29 May 2013 (UTC)