Talk:Scion Audio/Visual

I'm putting it out there that I have a conflict of interest (WP:COI) with this particular article. I work for a marketing agency that serves Scion and Scion Audio/Visual as a client. I will do my absolute best to keep any edits/additions/deletions as neutral and objective as possible, and am open to discussion and critique of any future revisions I make to this article. Bray1286 (talk) 20:13, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for being upfront about your COI. Please understand that, while your informed contributions may well be valuable, the article belongs to no one, and other editors will have just as much of a say in the article - in fact probably more given your COI - and you and your client may wind up with edits that it doesn't particularly care for! Good luck! JohnInDC (talk) 23:04, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Totally understood. The goal of any updates I make are to simply add relevance and and improve accuracy. By no means will I attempt to censor any criticism, or remove other content deemed unfavorable by the client. As you said, we are not the owners of this page. We have communicated the realities and openness of wikipedia to the client and they understand that we are not the owners or sole contributors. Bray1286 (talk) 00:57, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Fixing the problems with this article - suggestions for step 1

Some of the problems with this article are laid out very clearly at the top (right now 23:20, 26 January 2011 (UTC)). Needs more independent third party references, including inline citations, that say things about the company and what it does.

Other parts of the problem are more fundamental and also more subtle. I removed the speedy deletion request because, even in its current state, this article told me something I didn't know, and something not necessarily to the advantage of the corporate organisation that apparently funds the subject of the article. Namely, a big corporation funds random CD giveaways and music events (on a very small scale) as an "in-house" label under another name, just to build up goodwill.

Amazing and unique? Probably not - I can check that with a friend of mine who was a journalist and now writes promotional things for a large tire company. But interesting? Potentially, yes.

And potential is where thing need to expand right now, if this article is to be saved. Someone (even our COI person) needs to find independent secondary sources (reliable ones, not blogs) that talk about how big corporations sometimes do small-scale community/cultural/Generation-Y/whatever work, and how Scion is an example of that; and then put that into the article.

This would (in my personal opinion) give the article a realistic, neutral angle on how Toyota has an interest in doing what it does with Scion, and why it does it, and the independent secondary sources that discuss it. And that would make an aspect that I thought was an interesting read (but I had to work it out in my own head) much clearer. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:20, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I agree that the article needs sourcing beyond the company's own claims about itself and what it's trying to accomplish. A quick web search did not turn up much third party attention at all, and if others' searches are no more fruitful, the subject may simply fail the general notability requirement. I echo the suggestion that independent secondary sources be added to this article. JohnInDC (talk) 00:18, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice Demiurge1000. Your suggestions will be very helpful as we work on making this page a more viable and accurate Wikipedia entry. Bray1286 (talk) 00:57, 27 January 2011 (UTC)