![]() | This 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. |
Just a small note, are there any credible references to back up what is said in the Company section on Leo Burnett's Company. I will research and update this section in due course -- JackMayhew (talk) 13:34, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
Just a follow up, i have now properly referenced this point. --JackMayhew (talk) 13:06, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
In my sandbox I added a reference/note to Time Magazine (^ "Time Magazine". Times 100 Persons of the Century. 1999. Retrieved March 11, 2012.) I wondered if its a problem if you have to subscribe to the website to access it? Jack Greenaway (talk) 19:32, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
As a part of a University module, fellow colleagues Jack Mayhew and Jack Greenaway will be editing this page to make it a more reliable source.
This will be our first Wikipedia article, so let us know if there are any problems/issues. For more information on our module, please check out one of our user pages.
Feel free to talk to us via our talk pages, we are friendly and appreciate any feedback!
Bossplw (talk) 11:21, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
Im sure you have seen but i have updated the Company section of the page (very interesting research actually) if there is anything vital that you think is needed in the section, let me know and ill update. Think we are organising the meetings today for today, tomorrow and Wednesday. See you later -- JackMayhew (talk) 13:08, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Is it just me, or does this whole article just read like ad copy? It feels more like promotional material off a company website than the sort of factual, referenced, balanced account that Wikipedia's supposed to offer. Amusingly appropriate for an advertising guru, I guess. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.237.154.107 (talk) 22:48, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
A group consisting of myself and two other people have now updated this article and we are continuing to add to this, i hope it doesn't read so much like an ad copy now. Cheers -- JackMayhew (talk) 13:11, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Could the 'Corny Language" sit within either the "Creative Progress" or "Advertising Techniques" as a sub-heading? Or is it best off as separate? Thoughts? Jack Greenaway (talk) 16:03, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Great to see people are actually viewing, editing and not deleting anything on the article, even though they are the mostly the unknown (random ip address'). Just thinking if theres any amendments to do? For example, could the references be created more into a 'Notes' section, and then the 'Reference' section contains the list of books, and their information, used in the article? Also, could more images could be uploaded, like another of his most popular works? Jack Greenaway (talk) 11:09, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
I agree with the comments on the idea of putting more pictures up but even though i have asked on the Teahouse, it seems like such a touchy issue regarding copyright laws? Thoughts? -- JackMayhew (talk) 13:13, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Good sources are the most important part of a decent article. The ones used here at the moment aren't the greatest. You should look in search in google books to see what you can find. Here is one I found for you:
This tool is very useful for creating references from google books too. SmartSE (talk) 20:35, 20 March 2012 (UTC)