Talk:Friskies/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 11:53, 11 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Grabbing this for a review. For the record, I'm aware of the COI issues, but I don't see that as a barrier to getting a good (or even great!) article just as long as everyone is aware of the potential problems.


 * Straight off, I notice that Grumpy Cat image is in a funny place. You've included it in the last line of the History section, in which case it won't appear in-line with the Endorsements section no matter the width of the monitor you're using. To at least get in in-line somewhere, I'd move it to the first line of the endorsements section. Also, it could do with a more explanatory caption emphasising something in the text - something like "Grumpy Cat (aka Tardar Sauce) became the brand's official spokesperson in 2013", although would be better with a subtle wording difference to the article body rather than a direct copy.
 * ✅ CorporateM (Talk) 13:55, 11 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Speaking of the endorsements section, I don't think it's right at the moment. I'd suggest a general expansion to become "Advertisements and endorsements"
 * ✅ CorporateM (Talk) 13:57, 11 August 2016 (UTC)


 * and move the line "In 2003, the Friskies brand was re-launched with new packaging. By this time, Friskies was the largest market-share holder in the cat food segment, with a 60 percent share of the wet food market and 49.3 percent share for dry food." to the Products sub-section.
 * ✅ CorporateM (Talk) 13:57, 11 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Not sure what to do with "Starting in 2011, Friskies has been developing digital games for cats on mobile devices that are played using touch-screens.", but if it was advertisement and endorsements then I guess it'd still fit within that section. Just keep the section in chronological order -
 * I think the games are to promote the cat food. If you check them out they are all free and themed with Friskies cat food products. CorporateM (Talk) 14:00, 11 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Duplicate link for Grumpy Cat within Endorsements atm.
 * ✅ CorporateM (Talk) 14:01, 11 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Wasn't "Dear Kitten" a Friskies viral advertisement? That'd fit well with an expanded "Advertisements and endorsements". Any information on that would be good, as would the advertising agency that created it and anything on Friskies' viral strategy. For example, the South by Southwest bacon thing they did last year, and their past sponsorship of cat video contests, the "Friskies 50", and that music video from Christmas 2013.
 * Sort of ✅. I started working on an expanded version here that includes many of these campaigns. I didn't find any substantial sources on Christmas 2013 thing. I'm also going to do some searches at AdWeek, as they seem to have covered most of their major advertising campaigns. CorporateM (Talk) 06:29, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ How's this? CorporateM (Talk) 16:21, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I think that would be spot on. I'd put that all in the mainspace version. There's just one further comment on top of everything else, and I'll put it here so that you don't miss it. The lead is a good brief summary of the Corporate and History sections, but doesn't cover this new section, nor the Products section. So information summarising those would need to be added. Miyagawa (talk) 23:03, 12 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Speaking of which, what was the reaction to these endorsements? You've got a cite there to an article entitled "Henri the cat sells out to Friskies, fills us with existential despair" and yet you don't mention a negative reaction. Any negativity to this would be balanced by the overwhelmingly positive reaction to Dear Kitten anyway.
 * That article's title is just a tongue and cheek comment about the cat's demeanor (like Grumpy Cat). I don't think any of their ads are really the subject of meaningful analysis appropriate for an encyclopedia, positive, or negative. CorporateM (Talk) 06:29, 12 August 2016 (UTC)


 * so did Grumpy Cat become the spokescat before or after he appeared in the game show?
 * ✅ CorporateM (Talk) 06:29, 12 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Products: Historical products? Discontinued products? I wouldn't go to the extent of repeating information already in the history section unless it was a very, very brief once sentence summary that lead into something else.
 * It's pretty routine for me to add a Product History sub-section or something similar, but in this case I just don't think we have the sources to do a historical treatment on the products. Cat food just isn't very newsworthy, so the press does not publish sources on them. CorporateM (Talk) 14:28, 11 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Citations - use a single date format across the entire article. Since this is an American product, it shouldn't be a British date format either.
 * ✅ I fixed inconsistencies in the date format for accessdates, but didn't change it to American date format. Someone changed it to British format a while back and I just don't think this kind of thing is worth fighting over. CorporateM (Talk) 14:28, 11 August 2016 (UTC)


 * I've also noticed that you've used out of date formatting on some of the citations. You should be using first=/last= not author=. This has caused you to have author names appearing in two different formats in the citations.
 * ✅ CorporateM (Talk) 14:30, 11 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Also, don't link some of the sources and not all of them.
 * Cite #3: You've linked this to an Amazon sales page, and formatted the cite so that it looks like Amazon.com is the published. This should be formatted properly like cite #1. Either you used the book, or you used the Amazon page - and if you used the Amazon page, then there's a problem since the information that has been cited using this simply isn't there. If you want the details of the book from an independent source then I suggest www.worldcat.org
 * ✅ Thanks. I use Yadkard to do the citations and sometimes it can be fickle and mistakes fall through the cracks, hence why it's great to get the article reviewed! CorporateM (Talk) 14:16, 11 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Cite #7: Change "date=" to "year=" to correct the formatting in the cite.
 * ✅ CorporateM (Talk) 14:13, 11 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Cite #15: Remove the "- ABC News" from the title of the article. That should be the publisher in the citation template.
 * ✅ CorporateM (Talk) 14:11, 11 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Cite #17: You can just say NBC rather than Nbcnews.com. Then link it to the appropriate article.
 * Sorry, should be NBC News. Miyagawa (talk) 11:56, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ CorporateM (Talk) 14:11, 11 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Cite #18: Is there an independent source you could use instead of YouTube? Social media and YouTube citations make certain editors nervous (despite that I can see it's obviously the official Friskies channel).
 * ✅ Sometimes if there are a lot of secondary sources about a primary source (a report, show, etc.) I like to also add a reference to that primary source, in addition to the secondary ones.I just trimmed it - it was not actually needed to support any article-text, but was just an accessory of sorts. CorporateM (Talk) 14:09, 11 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Cite #19: I take it that the article is the physical copy of Brandweek rather than online? If so, it could do with a page number. If not, then it needs a url added to it.
 * ✅ I found it by searching the local university library's online archives. I don't see a page number there, but I added a link to Highbeam, just so others can at least verify the article's existence (plus many Wikipedians have Highbeam access) CorporateM (Talk) 14:05, 11 August 2016 (UTC)


 * That's all I've got for the moment, although I may have some further comments once you've had a chance to review those. Placing the nomination on hold for now. Miyagawa (talk) 11:53, 11 August 2016 (UTC)


 * One more thing I noticed - Cite #13: the access date is in a different format to the others.
 * ✅ CorporateM (Talk) 17:17, 13 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Then I spotted something else - Cite #12: Business Insider should be in italics. Miyagawa (talk) 23:08, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ CorporateM (Talk) 17:17, 13 August 2016 (UTC)


 * I'm being a pest now. Cite #3: Any chance of page numbers? Miyagawa (talk) 23:09, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I can get them if you really want them, but it would take several hours of driving to the library and back, getting the hard-copy, and reading through it - it's probably not really worth it. CorporateM (Talk) 17:17, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm certainly not going to hold back GA status because of it. If you're there for some other reason, grab them for completeness. Miyagawa (talk) 19:31, 13 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Just realised the final action probably got lost in the shuffle above. Once you've moved Talk:Friskies/draft into the mainspace version, I think this will probably ready for promotion. Miyagawa (talk) 16:05, 15 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks !! Do you mind doing the honors? Best practice is for COI editors to avoid article-space as much as possible and a section on their advertising strategies is just the type of thing that may cause someone to attack me for alleged impropriety. CorporateM (Talk) 16:57, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Not a problem. I'll do that now, and then I think we're done. Miyagawa (talk) 17:11, 15 August 2016 (UTC)