Talk:Lovevery

(Moved conversation from User talk:Grand'mere Eugene):

Help with draft publication
Hi Grandmere. It is nice to meet you. I see that you are an active Wikipedian and a member of WP:COMPANIES with a stated interest in family-owned businesses. Could you please take a look at my draft for Lovevery, an American educational toy company. I can't publish, because of my conflict of interest, but hope you might agree that it is ready for publication. I welcome your input. Thank you! Freddie at Lovevery (talk) 19:30, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi,, I've made a start, and will be verifying all the sources in the next few days. In the meantime, please declare your COI on the draft's talk page-- see COI compliance for appropriate templates. Grand&#39;mere Eugene (talk) 20:23, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 * , I've reviewed all the references and revised some. For subscription sources, I've included quotes in the citation templates, as well as the "subscription" url. Please declare your COI on your talk page and the article's talk page. I'm still working on summarizing the 2nd paragraph of the description section, rather than the cluttered series of quotes that I threw together. That information, though, contributes to the WP:NPOV stance that is necessary to avoid deletion for being promotional. I need to go through the entire article text again to screen for puffery or cruft. Regards, Grand&#39;mere Eugene (talk) 00:54, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Update
, I added a COI tag aboe, and moved the conversation here from my talk page to keep the conversation transparent to other editors. If you have objections or other requests, please leave them here, as I will monitor it through my watchlist. Let me know her if you think my edits to your original text have errors or misrepresent any facts. Cheers! Grand&#39;mere Eugene (talk) 22:04, 4 January 2022 (UTC)


 * , thank you again for all your help with the publication of this article. I would like to suggest a revision to the current third paragraph of the description section which begins The Wall Street Journal asks to give a broader scope of the and highlight a bit more of its content. My suggestion is as follows:

Reviews of the company products, including one in The Wall Street Journal, express the opinions of users, consumer experts, and psychologists. One mom said “kids don’t need fancy to have fun” and a child development expert said the toys “help generate interaction between parent and child, that’s an amazing thing.” Dr. Harvey Karp said that Lovevery’s products alleviate parental stress of finding the right toys for kids’ ages, “They’re thoughtful. They’re really trying to be supportive and to be educational as well as being helpful for the child.” Products are also available at Target and other retailers.


 * Thank you for your consideration of this change.Freddie at Lovevery (talk) 14:37, 24 January 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ (mostly)--- I revised the tag lines to ID the reviewers and their credentials, and expanded the quotes somewhat for accuracy, again working to preserve WP:NPOV. I created a separate subsection and re-paragraphed to allow the reader easier comparison of the comments. I also modified the quote parameters of the WSJ source to include the additional Karp comment. I've checked the article for potential copyvio using this AI copyright tool -- so far, so good. Cheers! — Grand&#39;mere Eugene (talk) 00:37, 25 January 2022 (UTC)