Talk:Sleeved blanket

Spam
As this is a hot commercial item, we may have trouble with links to sites which have a commercial rather than educational focus. The official sites for Snuggie and Slanket seem reasonable but I am inclined to remove the other external links which are being added. I don't like to be too censorious though - comments from other editors are invited. Colonel Warden (talk) 09:50, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I think snuggiesightings.com, snuggievision.com and snuggiepubcrawls.com violate WP:EL, and have removed them. They have very little actual content except for links between the three sites and prominent affiliate links to buy a blanket. Not informational at all. --Bonadea (talk) 08:43, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

New article on the subject
There was an article about this topic in the New York Times today: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/27/business/media/27adco.html Apparently the "Freedom Blanket" was the earliest (1992?) of this particular design... although I know that I owned a blanket with sleeves formed via snaps years before that as a kid. There's also the "cuddle wrap"; not sure how old that is.--Father Goose (talk) 21:08, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

"Kitsch"
Why is "kitsch" linked at the bottom? That doesn't seem very unbiased.

129.21.66.234 (talk) 23:51, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Name brand
I think that this page would benefit from more details about Snuggie the name brand, or perhaps Snuggie should have its own page. I'm curious about how the company itself is doing after the sudden success a few years back, and there doesn't seem to be any Wikipedia article providing details about that. This page has some brief history about the company but overall is a page about sleeved blankets in general. I feel like we need somewhere to provide information specific tot he Snuggie itself, such as the creator, the commercials, the company's success, etc. -KaJunl (talk) 13:11, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Popularity
This section contains this:


 * In March 2018, Allstar Marketing Group, owner of the "Snuggie" brand, was fined $7.5 million by the US Federal Trade Commission for deceptive marketing and to provide refunds to deceived customers

This just seems to pop up out of nowhere. It is not clear what this has to do with the product's "popularity". And it is mystifying, because it gives no hint as to WHY the company was fined for "deceptive marketing".

Yes, there is a footnote, but it seems like that information should be included in the statement in the article, if it's felt to be important for this bit to be in this section at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.95.43.253 (talk) 18:48, 22 September 2023 (UTC)