Talk:Geomag
Add topic | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Capitalization of Geomag
[edit]The article used to have it as GEOMAG but to make it consistent with Wikipedia and also because it is Geomag (not GEOMAG) when it appears as text on the official website in sentences. Zephyr103 07:58, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Removal of Links
[edit]User:Magnoman (19-Apr-07) removed all links in the article to things that were not Geomag, and corrected some English. I'm not sure what the wiki etiquette is here, but this seems to me like someone who doesn't want competitor products linked from this page.
I'd like to reverse those changes on the grounds that Geomag has become like "hoover" in the UK, a brand-specific term for a category of things, and as such the article partly has a role as a placeholder for pointers to related manufacturers.
Any advice from experienced Wikipedians? --Karl Horton 21:44, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
- I don't know about "experienced" - but I feel that an article on Geomag should list all rival and compatible products. Indeed, if it didn't, I would suspect that a shill had been at work. Maproom (talk) 21:37, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- I think it might be better to have a list of magnetic construction toys and link to it from Geomag etc so we can add more details perhaps in a table. - Rod57 (talk) 00:52, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Too promotional
[edit]This used to be a good short article. It was converted into badly-written promotional material, vaunting all the products and using boldface excessively. I have undone much of the damage, but there's scope for further change back towards an encyclopedia article. Maproom (talk) 08:23, 20 February 2015 (UTC)