Wikipedia:Peer review/Morphsuits/archive1

Morphsuits

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Looking to worth this article into shape, looking for advice. Thanks! -- Zanimum (talk) 15:31, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Comments from Jappalang

Lede

• "It distributes branded spandex costumes, based on the existing zentai concept."

  I see a few faults with this statement. There is imprecision in casting the concept as "existing"; is this idea constantly changing? If so, which version is this suit based on? Is "existing" still valid three months from now? A sole link to "zentai" is not really a good move. Readers may find that article more interesting and never come back to this one. Explain here what is zentai, e.g. "based on the Japanese concept of full-body tights (zentai)." Readers will go there if they are more interested in zentai, but at least those who are willing to read Morphsuits first would not be lured away.

  I've removed the word "concept", reformatted the sentence.

  You have created a red-link, skin-tight garments. Is that another name for "full-body tights"? Are you planning to turn the link blue (create the article)?

  Oops, fixed. -- Zanimum (talk) 14:12, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

• "As of May 2011, it claims to be the world's largest fancy dress brand."

  I do not think that even directly expressing such claims as the company's own would befit WP:NPOV. "World's largest" is simply too controversial to leave it as a primary claim. A secondary reliable source is definitely needed in my view.

  I've moved it down to the corporate section.

  The concerns still remains, regardless of where it is stated. I do not believe such claims of performance are encyclopaedic if there are no supporting secondary sources. Jappalang (talk) 13:34, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

• "The trio had jobs at Barclays, Procter & Gamble, and BT, which they left after the first year."

  After their first year at the job, or one year after setting up Morphsuits?

  Clarified.

History

• "... which a friend was wearing a zentai bodysuit. At the event, the friend became somewhat of a celebrity, ... Researching the fancy dress market, the friends invested ..."

  Who exactly is the "friend"? If he is part of "the friends", why is he not identified?

  They have never publicly identified the friend, but it was not one of the three founders.

  If he is not one of the founders, then that creates a problem. He is now confused as being one of "the friends". "The friends" should be clarified as to who are they. Jappalang (talk) 03:46, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

  Reworded. -- Zanimum (talk) 14:12, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

• "The moniker of "Morphsuits" stemmed from the fact that 'we noticed that everyone who wore them morphed into a more fun version of themselves', says Fraser Smeaton."

  This demands a rephrase in my view. In its current structure, the article is stating Smeaton's opinion as "fact" ("stemmed from the fact"). This is not true. It is just the opinion of the suit's creators that people "morphed into a more fun version of themselves".

  Fixed. -- Zanimum (talk) 14:12, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

  Better in tone but the "... that ... that ..." is sort of repetitive. I boldly went and tweaked it. Jappalang (talk) 01:35, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

• "a lot of 2 a.m. finishes"

  Finishes in what?

  Clarified.

• "Since then outsourcing has raised their indirect staffing to 200 as of August 2011."

  "Since then" is redundant when you have "as of xxxxx".

  Reworded.

• "One early boost to their sales was eight red Morphsuit wearers ..."

  The sale of eight red Morphsuits boosted their sales?

  Reword, two sentences into one.

  I think the change is a bit awkward. Suggestion: "The company received a boost to its sales when its products were spotted in the sports coverage of 2009 British Lions tour of South Africa; shots of eight prominent fans in red Morphsuits among the crowd were featured in the newspaper photographs and on television."

  I apologise for leaving a incomplete suggestion, but care and independent decision should have been taken. The current statement "The company received a boost to its sales when sports coverage of the 2009 British Lions tour of South Africa, at which eight fans wearing red Morphsuits, which covered extensively by sports journalists and photographers." is quite awkward. Jappalang (talk) 13:34, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

• "... North America in fact weren't their brand ..."

  "In fact" is not needed and is discouraged in encyclopaedic writing. So too is the use of contractions.

  Changed both occurrences.

  There is still a contraction elsewhere in the article. Jappalang (talk) 03:46, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

  Would you mind identifying where? As far as I know, the only time apostrophes are used in the article are for posessive pluralizations and for the title of a television series. -- Zanimum (talk) 14:14, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Corporate

• "Trained with "FMCG marketing" at Gillette and later Proctor and Gamble, leading marketing on Pantene, Pringles, and Gillette."

  This sentence is incomplete; it has no main clause.

  Reworded.

  Please check the tenses ("he lead marketing"?). Jappalang (talk) 03:46, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

  Fixed.

• "Lawson is brother of Rory Lawson, son of Alan Lawson, and grandson of Bill McLaren."

  What pertinence does this relationship have with Morphsuits?

  Early association of the items was with sporting events. Fair enough? I've clarified their backgrounds.

  No. I see nowhere in the article that states their marketing strategy involves targeting sporting events or the participants. Jappalang (talk) 03:46, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

• What does "sell up" mean?

  To allow an acquisition. Clarified.

  Linking "sell their company" to takeover is ill-advised per WP:EASTEREGG (a sell-out is also not a takeover). Remove the link (or clarifying what is this actually suppose to mean) and this issue would be resolved. Jappalang (talk) 03:46, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

• "The company has had overtures from private equity investors in mid-to-late-2011, since their Ernst & Young Entrepreneur of the Year Awards nomination in Scotland;"

  The current sentence should be rephrased; it is not clear what "mid-to-late-2011" refers to.

  Rephrased.

  When was the company nominated for Entrepreneur of the Year? Jappalang (talk) 13:34, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

• "the company suggests that they're too busy to pay much attention ..."

  Again, ditch the contractions. Also the usage of mass noun is consistent. Either use single or plural throughout a sentence, not flip-flopping like in here.

  How's the new sentence "they have suggested the business has kept them too busy to consider any of the offers."?

• Please interpret the source and present its information in terms the layman would better understand. Does "return rate" refer to the profit they receive from selling a suit or the number of products returned by the distributors (for what reasons)? What is "SKU"?

  I've tried to clarify, but this was intended to be a business article.

  It is not supposed to be a business article. According to the project's aims, it is supposed to be an encyclopaedic article about a business and is accessible (readable) to the layman. Jappalang (talk) 03:46, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Marketing

• I fail to understand "Within photos, 'firsts' are a common occurence."

  Clarified.

  Eh... I see the fragment of a sentence, "Many wearers of"; I presume this is the intended clarification. Where is the rest of it? Jappalang (talk) 03:46, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

  "Many wearers of" has been removed, but I see nothing to resolve the original concern. Jappalang (talk) 13:34, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

• "In reference to rugby, they have described their technique as 'scrum marketing'."

  What is "their technique"? As far as I can tell, nothing was elaborated about it. Earlier sentences as summarized is simply "The company has a Facebook page with competitions." How does this tally with the image of rugby scrums?

  Deleted the sentence.

• "Being one of the earliest brands to court a general market, the terms "Morphsuits" and "morphs" regularly are applied to events related to any sort of zentai suit."

  The reference (from The Sun) does not support the first clause. The second clause is also not borne out by this source (The Sun uses the terms but does not state them as regular uses).

The article fails to note the founding date of the company (the BBC article would point it as 2009). Are there any criticisms over their products? I understand that as a recent company, it has comparatively less attention and history than more established companies; as such, the article may not be "broad" in coverage in terms of WP:WIAGA, but this article cab be improved by polishing the language and presentation. Jappalang (talk) 03:05, 6 December 2011 (UTC)