Talk:Global Gillette

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Flag of Massachusetts
Massachusetts Portal
Global Gillette is part of WikiProject Massachusetts, an effort to create, expand, and improve Massachusetts-related articles to a feature-quality standard. For more information on this project or to get involved see the WikiProject Massachusetts project page.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.

I removed the stub designation. It doesn't seem very stubby... uriah923(talk) 22:40, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Chop up Global Gillette

I think we should have a page about Gillette brands that is referenced in the PG infobox, and then another page about the former company, Global Gillette. Suggestions? Concerns? Might make this my next wikiproject... --munboy 22:08, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Gillette P.R.

Does anyone else feel this article reads like someone from Gillette's PR office contributed the majority of information?

It definitely does - needs quite some NPOVing... -- Marcika
Oh, so I'm not the only one who thought that. Do you simply change these claims to "Gillete claims" or what? --Vogateer

[edit] P&G Merge

With regards to the suggested merge with Procter & Gamble, working within P&G I think this may be a bit premature. My understanding of it all is that Gillette will retain it's identity for at least the foreseeable future, and while some of it's brands will be hyped by P&G under the billion dollar brand portfolio, it'll still be Gillette for the main. Andy C 21:02, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Do not merge with P&G

In my opinion we shouldnt merge this artile with P&G because most people know the Gilette brand separately and it would be confusing to those who simply wish to find out about Gillete.

As per the earlier comment that it seems the article was written by a P&G rep.. I would have to say it doesnt matter unless false information is presented or "negative" truths about the company are deleted.

[edit] Let Gillette be

I think this article shoudn't be merged with P&G, since Gillette certainly has it's own history, style and personality. And I think P&G will not 'kill' this personality for a long time, since that's a strong brand. It isn't profitable to break down a brand. Arseni 11:00, 22 March 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Keep it

Keep Global Gillette it is too bigger topic


[edit] NPOV

This article is clearly POV the way it stands. It needs to be checked for POV and relevance. I have tagged tha main article Spiggot 12:42, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

What precisely are you pointing at as NPOV? What words, sentence, claims, etc.? Gillette is indisputably one of the most successful personal care companies of the 20th century; it is *absolutely* going to have things to crow about. If you live in the U.S., I would bet the house you have used *dozens* of Gillette products in your lifetime. It is definitely Notable. I would hasten to add that WP:V is at issue for comments critical of Gillette. If your gripe is simply that it is a big company, companies are bad, etc., etc., that's not a justification for claiming NPOV. If there is false information or something that is not sourced, improve it. It is not, by my lights, POV as is. I'm going to Be Bold.--BradPatrick 17:21, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
I agreed with Spiggot until I went through and removed what looked like a marketing commercial. There is no need to put down how to access a product on wikipedia, and some of the claims were definitely outright POV, for example the following quotes which I reworded:
"Trac II Plus: The Trac II was the world's first two-blade razor, debuting in 1971 to rave reviews. The second blade allows men to shave their faces in a little more than half the strokes of previous razors"
"These razors gained an infamous reputation as the first to be constantly stolen by wives and girlfriends"
"which makes for a closer shave than ever before."
"The Excel did not capture the imagination of America's men as its previous razors did."
"Gillette are the market leaders because they have such a high brand worth and are continually producing new and innovative products."
Anywhere that weasel words are used I am suspicious of NPOV. That in particular is what makes it so hard for companies to have pages on wikipedia, its hard for them not to market themselves here. Ansell 05:26, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
Who wrote this thing, Gillette's advertising department? It's all current products. I want history, product conception & development, competition, context. If I want ads, I'll go to Advertising Weekly. Trekphiler 06:33, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] It is not called "Global Gillette"

There is very little indication that this is the official name change. It is still known as "The Gillette Company." Internally, I believe it is referred to as the "Gillette GBU" standing for "Gillette Global Business Unit." The brand, Gillette, is still intact. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bjs1234 (talk • contribs) 01:18, 3 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Merge "Early Products" and "Older Products" sections

The "Early Products" section reads very poorly. It also is basically a description of one razor. It seems like this should be merged into a bullet point in the "Older Products" section, perhaps renamed to "Discontinued Products". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.172.226.100 (talk) 23:41, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gillette Boycott

Gillette has been the subject of a consumer boycott for it's use of RFID technology and it's "smart shelves" that photograph shoppers as they pick the product up off the shelf without their knowledge. This is an interesting point about the company. Why is there no mention of it in the article. It could be mentioned objectively using language that doesn't take sides. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.217.6.9 (talk) 05:33, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Move to Gillette

This article is in the space of the former name of the company - there is no company anymore just a brand - and the brand is Gillette (or The Gillette Company) This should be moved to Gillette. Just a thought.--CastAStone//(talk) 20:16, 26 December 2007 (UTC)