Talk:Emotional branding/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. |
Suggestions
The intro reads well and is clear, but the history section is still quite confusing to me. In particular you swing between a history of branding as a practice for simply identifying products from the competition (something that does not entail emotional attachment) and a history of emotional branding. It is undefined when the history of emotional branding began. I doubt that this history is separable from a history of advertising but you hardly cite advertising here. So I would say make a passing reference to the fact that branding was originally just a way of marking products and go directly to advertising and marketing strategies to emotionally charge a brand. (Note that the link to Thomas J. Barrett points to the wrong page).Mdseriis (talk) 21:53, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Content: Intermediate. I agree with both the comments, even though the overall article is very powerful- the introduction is slightly controversial.With regards to the history section, talking about emotional branding as a story may help and then if supported by examples will be more powerful. Direct use of examples such as 'the scarlet letter' do add more emphasis, but then again is this really relevant? why not talk more about the evolution process- why did emotional branding really come into being? Also a substantial part of your content seems clustered- I would ease the matter up into sub sections, this makes it easier for the reader to understand and grasp complex concepts.
Structure: Good. As mentioned before, tying the sections into sub sections and smaller portions will help ease up the matter. Further, allow the techniques section to flow seamlessly by adding relevant sub sections. Expanding the section on motivation or tying it into a larger section will help.
Sources: Good references, could these references be used to add in some relevant examples? --Sanyad23 (talk) 15:10, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Content: clear and has good substance. I like how you linked a lot of things to your page.
Structure: Good organization. I made a few edits to the structure of your criticisms section
Sources: A lot of good references.
Tang.ca (talk) 19:10, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Content: examples of the best emotional branding campaigns? Add pictures of emotionally branded advertisements. Structure: break the "techniques" into subsections (e.g. "nostalgia") so it's easier to read/scan. History section is a bit conversational - avoid this. Sources: some notes are redundant - merge them. More sources will make it a more secure article.
I made a few edits as well. Specifically, I gave stronger wording to the intro and changed the format of your numbered list SCTT (talk) 23:26, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Suggestions for improving the page:
Possible Sections:
Possible resources:
Jonessam2013 (talk) 16:24, 28 January 2013 (UTC)