Talk:AKQA

"reads like an advertisement" infobox

Can someone help out by highlighting the sections that are most problematic? My first reaction to that infobox is, of course the article reads like an advertisement, it was written by experts in the advertising industry. Ashleyisachild (talk) 02:39, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Seems like this infobox needs updating. There have been made quite a few edits since August 2012 when the infobox was added. In my opinion this article contains sufficient multiple independent and third-party sources to back-up its content. I added links were citation references were still needed. As AKQA is a digital agency and their notable products and services revolve around digital marketing, advertising and technology, this seems to cause the "reads like an advertisement" feel.--Jimengna (talk) 22:19, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on AKQA. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120603044527/http://nw-businesssense.com/Ajaz-Ahmed.html to http://nw-businesssense.com/Ajaz-Ahmed.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100412142336/http://www.brandrepublic.com/Discipline/Digitalmarketing/News/995719/Comparethemarketcom-Spotify-AKQA-triumph-Revolution-Awards to http://www.brandrepublic.com/Discipline/Digitalmarketing/News/995719/Comparethemarketcom-Spotify-AKQA-triumph-Revolution-Awards/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081122025119/http://www.marketingvox.com/akqa_is_creativitys_firstever_interactive_agency_of_the_year-020608/ to http://www.marketingvox.com/akqa_is_creativitys_firstever_interactive_agency_of_the_year-020608/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:04, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Initial corrections

Hi, I’m Gemma and I work for AKQA in London. As part of my job, I’ve been asked to help update this article. Per the Terms of Use, I’m disclosing my financial conflict of interest (I’ve added the “paid contributor” template above) and I’ll do my best to follow all applicable guidelines. I’m aware there have been some issues with the past content of the article and an editor removed a lot of details to resolve a warning on the article about advertising content. My aim here is not to seek re-addition of any of that, and I’d like to make some suggestions for more appropriate content, with editors’ review to make sure that there are no issues with the tone and type of information.

As a first request, there are a few details in the article that are incorrect and I’d like to ask if they can be fixed:

• The founding date for AKQA is not 2001 it is 1994; can this be updated in the infobox?
  • The confusion here is because 2001 was when AKQA and San Francisco-based agency Citron Haligman Bedecarre merged, however AKQA was originally founded in 1994.

• Also in the infobox, the list of services is not accurate to the company’s current services and doesn’t have a citation. I saw that in previous conversations above, editors have wondered if the long list seems promotional. Could the existing list be replaced simply by the services listed on our website:
  • Design, Communications and Technology

• Also, James Hilton is included in the infobox and in the History as a founder of AKQA. While he did join the company as its creative director, he was not officially a founder of the company as a company officer. Per AKQA's Companies House listing, he was only a Director from 1999 to 2001.

• The description of AKQA in the first line of the article is very narrowly focused compared with AKQA's standing as a full service creative agency. Could it be changed to be clearer and add a little more information?
  • Current: AKQA is a digital agency that specialises in creating digital services and products.
  • Suggested: AKQA is a global digital design and communications agency, owned by WPP. The company was founded in London in 1994 and expanded globally in 2001 after a merger with three other agencies.

Can someone review these and make the edits if they agree with what I'm suggesting? I’m grateful for any feedback. Thanks, GRedgrave from AKQA (talk) 10:24, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi again, as no-one has replied yet, I wanted to invite a couple of editors who might be interested to look at this. User:Ollee: You recently did some editing of the page to delete details that had been flagged as an issue and I noticed you'd made a little change earlier this week. User:Dormskirk: It looks like you did a lot of editing on our parent company, WPP's page not too long ago. Would either of you want to review these or be able to suggest a good option to get input? Thanks, GRedgrave from AKQA (talk) 11:50, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

References

I have made a couple of corrections. I will let other editors look at the marketing related matters. I suggest you use the {{request edit}} template. Dormskirk (talk) 12:43, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Good job GRedgrave from AKQA! This is exactly the right way to do Wikipedia.

Re: your suggested first para

'Expanded globally in 2001' is probably a bit misleading.

AKQA didn't arrive in Australia until a couple of years ago, for instance.

I also wonder what the word 'global' adds in the intro; marketing speak, or useful indicator?

I've removed the history section entirely. Ajaz is not a known quantity outside of the agency world and does not have his own Wikipedia entry so doesn't make sense to mention here.

The 'History' section is so slim, now, that it make sense simply to remove it.

Is there anything that should be mentioned in that spot, do you think?

Happy to work with you to improve this entry ollee (talk) 01:31, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you both for your replies, User:Dormskirk and User:Ollee. To reply quickly to Dormskirk first, thanks for making those edits and I'll use the request edit template when posting future requests.

Ollee: Thanks for offering to help with this article, I do want to make sure any updates meet with Wikipedia community approval.

About "global" in the introduction, I included that since AKQA has a presence in so many different countries and provides services worldwide. We're not really based in one main location and tend to be described as "global" in media. That said, if it's not appropriate to include "global" in that first line, I understand.

You mentioned that "expanded globally in 2001" feels misleading, perhaps a different way to explain that is that the company "significantly expanded its international presence". Would that work instead?

I'm working on research and putting together some details for the History and would love to share those soon. Can you explain why it's not necessary to mention our founder? So much of the coverage about AKQA references Ajaz, and he's received a lot of media attention and recognition as a businessperson, especially in the UK (for instance, he received an MBE). Is it more that it seemed too much emphasis while there were so few other details present in that section? Thanks again, GRedgrave from AKQA (talk) 17:27, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

History content for review

Moved from User talk:GRedgrave from AKQA/History draft § History content for review

 – Moved to talk page of article which user has requested to have edited. Seagull123 Φ 16:19, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi again, following my request above and the edits made by User:Ollee and User:Dormskirk, the AKQA article is much more accurate but now has very very little information. To help build out the article, I have a potential draft for some History content for editors to review. I've put the draft in my user space here:

• User:GRedgrave_from_AKQA/History_draft

All of the content is based on media coverage of AKQA over its history since its founding in 1994. I've avoided any press releases or using the company website, and just focused on major press hits. I'd be grateful if editors could take a look and consider adding this to the article. As I am an employee of AKQA, I won't make any edits myself. Thanks, GRedgrave from AKQA (talk) 09:40, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Good work GRedgrave from AKQA! I applaud the way that you're going about this, even if we don't necessarily agree on content ;-)

You mention concern about the article's length... is there a view within the business that longer article = greater stature?

I feel like the first para of the history section and the last para could be included with some work but I don't think the content sandwiched in between is really very useful or interesting for Wikipedia users.

Re: the first para, was the first website capable of broadcasting live radio over the Internet for Virgin Radio, Microsoft, McDonalds, BMW and Coca-Cola simultaneously?!

A notable first like this seems to be as worthy inclusion, but I'd like to be clear on what it is.

Re: your earlier question about not mentioning Ajaz, I think he's not relevant unless he's noteworthy enough to have his own Wikipedia entry. He may well be noteworthy enough for this... I know he's written a couple of books, has likely been mentioned in a few, too... but until that exists I don't feel like including his name wouldn't add anything useful.

ollee (talk) 00:10, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks,User:Ollee, these notes are helpful and I have some thoughts and questions for you.

You asked about whether a longer article is considered equivalent to greater stature within the business. I'm not really approaching this with that mindset. It's simply that there's very little in this article right now, barely a few lines, and there's been so much coverage of AKQA that would support more detailed content. My understanding of Wikipedia is that ideally each article should give a clear overview of its topic, as possible based on the available sources, so that's my aim!

In terms of the specific feedback on the draft:

• First, I've fixed the wording regarding Virgin Radio so that is hopefully more clear now ;-)
• I'm surprised that you mention that there's nothing interesting for readers between the first and last paragraphs. If only those two paragraphs were included then the following major milestones would be missed:

AKQA's major expansion out of the UK in 2001

The company surviving the dot com bubble bursting and still continuing to expand. At the time this was a major feat since many early digital companies did not survive

Acquisition by WPP in 2012

• I'm still confused about not including even a brief mention of Ajaz. I believe he would be notable, so would we just have to add back a mention of him at such a time as an article existed? If you can explain what you mean by the information not being useful, that would help a lot. I am struggling to see how it's not useful to mention who founded the company. Likewise with some of the other information you're suggesting be cut from the draft, what is the cut-off for useful and interesting vs. not? I've been basing it on what received major press coverage, but I'm curious if there's another way to weigh it under Wikipedia's guidelines.

Grateful for your feedback and thoughts on the best next steps. Thanks, GRedgrave from AKQA (talk) 10:46, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi again, I've reached out for more feedback at a WikiProject and also been hopeful that Ollee would return here, but it seems like they're not able to and no-one else has replied. From looking around, the request queue is very long right now and I'm wondering how best to find someone to help with feedback. Would either User:Dormskirk or User:Seagull123 have any suggestions? Or potentially be willing to offer any feedback? Thanks, GRedgrave from AKQA (talk) 15:46, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi - I can see you have been working hard on this. I have in the past responded to numerous edit requests over many years and would normally have been delighted to help. But it appears that this is no longer possible. And I do not wish to be sanctioned for my second offence of responding to edit requests when other editors may wish to comment / edit the text. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 16:14, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for this note User:Dormskirk, I'm sorry to hear that you're not able to offer feedback. If you do have any ideas on anywhere else I might ask for help, that would be great. Otherwise I'll see if anyone watching the request list is available soon. Thanks, GRedgrave from AKQA (talk) 16:30, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi all, following User:Ollee's feedback above and while I wait for other editors to review, I've made some changes to the History section draft in my user space. As Ollee had mentioned that some of the draft would not be of interest to readers, I took a critical look and trimmed out some of the content. Here's the latest version:

• User:GRedgrave_from_AKQA/History_draft

The details I focused on keeping are those that relate to the company's major milestones and demonstrate how AKQA has grown and evolved over its history. Does this look good to editors? Any changes needed before it could be added to the article?

To reiterate my disclosure, I am an employee of AKQA, which is why I'm making this request and won't add the content myself. Thanks, GRedgrave from AKQA (talk) 16:30, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Me again! I wanted to let editors know that I've finished up drafting potential content for the article and have a full draft in my user space. If anyone would like to take a look, it is here:User:GRedgrave_from_AKQA/Full_draft This is based on media coverage of AKQA and written up similarly to what I've seen for other agencies. I noticed User:Dial911 just updated this article to a "stub", so hopefully this content can help build out the page. Thanks, GRedgrave from AKQA (talk) 14:19, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello! I shall take a look at the draft and add suitable content to mainspace as I get some time. Dial911 (talk) 15:47, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks in advance, User:Dial911! As you can see, I've been hoping for editors to come and review for quite a while, so would love your feedback and any updates you're willing to make. Thanks, GRedgrave from AKQA (talk) 09:49, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

I have added text on your behalf. Bear in mind that Wikipedia community can change, edit, modify, delete and add content in full or parts any time. So do not expect your article to remain exactly the same. Besides, thank you for your contribution to the encyclopedia. Dial911 (talk) 21:55, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much, User:Dial911! So happy to see you were comfortable with adding my draft. Totally understand what you're saying about other editors being able to come by and make any changes, that absolutely makes sense. If you still would be interested to help, I was wondering about the introduction and infobox changes from the draft. I'd put together a bit more of a summary of AKQA for the introduction and there's a couple of small edits that would be great in the infobox (adjusting Ajaz's title to "founder", and including "design" and "product design" in the Services). Is that something you'd be willing to look at adding too? Thanks, GRedgrave from AKQA (talk) 09:43, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Introduction text and infobox correction for review

Hi again, following up from my request above which Dial911 kindly reviewed, I have a smaller request to update the introduction and infobox. Basically, the current introduction has some typos and the long list of locations doesn't seem ideal, the infobox lists Ajaz as a co-founder which is incorrect and doesn't include a couple of our main services. The specific changes I'm asking for are:

• Adjusting Ajaz's title to "CEO and founder" in the infobox, which is accurate based on company records
• Adding "Design" and "Product design" in the Services in the infobox, if the current list should be kept.
• Providing more of a summary of the article in the introduction and removing the list of locations. Here's my draft for that, with new text in green:

AKQA is a digital design and communications agency owned by WPP. It was founded in London in 1994 and expanded internationally in 2001 through a merger with agencies based in the United States and Singapore. It operated as an independent agency until 2012, when it was acquired by WPP. Initially the firm focused on technology and digital projects, later broadening its focus on design and innovation to services including product and spatial design. In 2020, WPP announced it was merging Grey Group with AKQA to create the AKQA Group. The resulting agency has around 6,000 employees in 50 countries.

As this is a summary of what's in the article already, I've not included any citations here, though please let me know if they are needed.

Again, I'd be super grateful if editors could review and consider adding this to the article. As I am an employee of AKQA, I won't make any edits myself. Thanks, GRedgrave from AKQA (talk) 11:38, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks so much to User:Dial911 for the review of these changes and updating everything. Very much appreciated. Thanks, GRedgrave from AKQA (talk) 16:56, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

New project to add

Hi again, it's been a while since my requests to update this page and there have been some great pieces of news for AKQA during that time. I'd like to ask editors about including a project in the Major work section that has won major recognition and gained a lot of coverage. It could be added right at the end of Major work.

Here's my draft:

The agency won a Cannes Lions Grand Prix for its design of "Looop" for H&M, an installation of a fabric recycling machine at a H&M store in Stockholm that customers could use create new items from old garments. The installation was intended to bring awareness to the issue of textile waste and show the store's customers how recycling could create new clothes. The installation was also a winner of Fast Company's "World Changing Idea" awards.

I would really appreciate it if editors could review this addition and include it in the article. As I am an employee of AKQA, I won't make any edits myself. Thanks, GRedgrave from AKQA (talk) 08:10, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Not notable enough Quetstar (talk) 02:03, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

References

Small update for History

Hi again, though I'm disappointed that my previous request was declined (the Looop project won several major awards so it definitely seemed notable to me), I respect Wikipedia editors' decision here. As an alternative update, is it possible to add a trimmed down version to the end of History to note these major award wins this year?

Here's my draft:

In 2021, AKQA won a Cannes Lions Grand Prix and a Fast Company "World Changing Idea" award for its design of "Looop" for H&M, an installation of a fabric recycling machine at a H&M store in Stockholm that customers could use create new items from old garments. The agency won an additional 15 Cannes Lions awards at the festival.

I really appreciate editors reviewing my requests and helping with this update. As I am an employee of AKQA, I won't make any edits myself. Thanks, GRedgrave from AKQA (talk) 15:50, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

GRedgrave from AKQA, The awards are not that notable so that you can dedicate this much content describing it. If it is considered for addition to the page, it should be short, preferably a one-liner. Chirota (talk) 03:18, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Y, partially done. The second sentence seemed not necessary. The firsts sentence has been added. Chirota (talk) 03:21, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the review that is great!GRedgrave from AKQA (talk) 15:04, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

References