Talk:Skullcandy
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 2 April 2008. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. |
Bias
[edit]This article is very biased. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.46.106.122 (talk) 02:35, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
- In what way?--Kubigula (talk) 02:40, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
- OK, I've added a tag. I do find CERTAIN biases, saying their products have a good reputation and all that.-- Vintei Talk 23:45, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
- The information comes from reliable product reviewers. There are two sentences reflecting positive views of the products and one sentence reflecting a negative view - two negative reviews are cited. I don't think the company would love this article, and I absolutely don't think it rises to the level requiring a template.--Kubigula (talk) 14:32, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
- I'm also curious as to why this is article is biased. It's seems pretty even to me. Needs more content though. Disinclination (talk) 11:50, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
- It is biased. Notice how they supposedly "hold a reputation amongst DJs internationally for providing comfort and high quality sound reproduction", citing one review from a general newspaper, not any sort of professional audio equipment publication. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.46.106.122 (talk) 20:10, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
- I'm also curious as to why this is article is biased. It's seems pretty even to me. Needs more content though. Disinclination (talk) 11:50, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
- The information comes from reliable product reviewers. There are two sentences reflecting positive views of the products and one sentence reflecting a negative view - two negative reviews are cited. I don't think the company would love this article, and I absolutely don't think it rises to the level requiring a template.--Kubigula (talk) 14:32, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
- OK, I've added a tag. I do find CERTAIN biases, saying their products have a good reputation and all that.-- Vintei Talk 23:45, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
advert template
[edit]The advert template was removed from the article. I'd like it back - what does anyone else think? It most certainly should stay on the talk page if it can't go on the article page. The article is gushing and not NPOV. 82.33.48.96 (talk) 22:08, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
- I am concerned that unsourced pro-Skullcandy content has been leaking into the article, but I still don't think it quite merits an advert template. You would have more credibility if you hadn't made that teen girl edit - doesn't seem like you are quite NPOV on Skullcandy yourself.--Kubigula (talk) 04:46, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
- The template is opposed by at least one editor. I won't revert it back. It'll be interesting to see if the unsourced pro skullcandy gets cleaned out as quickly as the ad-templates did. Also, skullcandy is clearly aiming at teengirls, but this is OR (who the fuck else is going to buy pink skull candy? Try a google image search), thus I won't revert that back until I get a reliable source. And even then I'll probably take it to talk first. 82.33.48.96 (talk) 00:00, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- THEY EVEN MAKE A MODEL CALLED "CHICK" - Skullcandy Ti Chick (Pink) 82.33.48.96 (talk) 00:03, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- We certainly don't want WP used for promotion, but promotional content isn't quite as serious as unsourced negative content. However, I do share the concern about balance, so I took a crack at pruning and tagging some specific sections that require sourcing.--Kubigula (talk) 03:01, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I just readded the template, without reading the talkpage first. The lede reads like marketdroid copy, and from a skim of the rest of the article it's no better. Some serious NPOVisation is needed. 79.72.144.225 (talk) 19:13, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
- I opposed this before, but I support it now. It appears there has been some COI editing going on.--Kubigula (talk) 02:44, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Removed ad template
[edit]I did some work cutting out opinions and clearly advertising language, so I'm taking off the ad template. --AW (talk) 21:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Tags
[edit]This article is an uneven pastiche of press release content on company growth performance and philanthropy. If all of the useful information presented here were presented in accord with Wikipedia standards, we'd have no more than two or three paragraphs. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 02:15, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
warum gibt es die seite nicht auf deutsch? / why is there no german site?
[edit](first of all: sorry for my bad english) why does no one make the german site of skullcandy? Isn't it important that the sites aren't only in english and french? Not everybody speaks everything.
Warum macht niemand die deutsche Seite von Skullcandy? Ist es nicht wichtig, dass es die Seiten auf verschiedenen Sprachen gibt? Nicht jeder spricht alles, wisst iht? -.- --84.148.179.200 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:17, 5 June 2010 (UTC).
This page needs an update
[edit]there needs to be a rework of the models they produce and a separation of discontinued headphones and current ones. other product information is needed. Professional writing style is needed too. 66.160.255.49 (talk) 23:20, 20 August 2011 (UTC)Christopher Bitikofer66.160.255.49 (talk) 23:20, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
Provided such details for current and discontinued products alike in 2015. More experienced editors reverted it to its uninformative state. Still revising and removing significantly outdated content, but the page should either be reduced to a summary or marked for deletion entirely. Pikachu247 05:36, 6 February 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pikachu247 (talk • contribs)
- Done - I removed promotional and outdated content, and replaced old or broken refs. The article is now stub-sized, and no longer reads like a fan page.--FeralOink (talk) 05:30, 26 November 2016 (UTC)