Consumerium talk:Intermediate page format: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
further thinking into linking from campaign target to campaign instead of the other way around |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
Also, it seems that Consensus, Criticism, Praise, or whatever, apply equally well to types of commodity, product, company, country, region or marketing/sale/feedback channel. So we probably have a generic format that is specialized in six ways. A fairly simple inheritance problem. | Also, it seems that Consensus, Criticism, Praise, or whatever, apply equally well to types of commodity, product, company, country, region or marketing/sale/feedback channel. So we probably have a generic format that is specialized in six ways. A fairly simple inheritance problem. | ||
---- | |||
Hey how about arranging the pages so that there is | |||
*[[Object X]] - "Neutral" | |||
*[[Object X/for]] - "Points of endorsement" | |||
*[[Object X/against]] - "Points of avoidance" | |||
then [[Campaign:Save The Great Apes]] could be linked from [[Company X/against]] with a [[score]] and brief free-form explanation why and how this [[campaign]] is connected to [[Company X]] or to be more precise how [[Company X]] is connected to the [[Campaign]]. The same campaign could be also linked from [[Company Y/for]] with a [[score]], wherein Company Y is providing a similar product in a responsible way thus implying a [[product substitution]] | |||
I believe that terms "for" and "against" are more easily translatable then "praise for" and "critisisms against" --[[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 23:34, 2 Mar 2004 (EET) | |||