Talk:Consumer

I wonder where the first use of this term was?

Cleanup needed

There is some good information in this article, but it clearly needs citations and some organization. Right now it reads more like a loose collection of unconnected information. Kubigula 02:48, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Got rid of a lot of links, does that warrant a removal of cleanup tag? Onionmon 20:04, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good job. I also just did some cleanup, so that I agree that the tag can go. Looking at the information that was in the article, it seemed logical to separate the discussion between the economic and legal notions of "consumer". I think it flows a bit better now - though it still needs expansion and more citations. -Kubigula (ave) 16:41, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling

I understand that spelling can be a thorny issue in WP, but I think it's jarring to change the internal link in an article to "mass customisation", which then links to "mass customization". So, I think the spelling in the article ought to remain as it was for two reasons - (1) the wikilinks lead to article that use ize instead of ise; and (2) WP:MOS suggests that the dialect of the first major contributor should be followed. --Kubigula (talk) 17:21, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, If you want to suggest dialect neutral word choices, I would certainly be willing to work on that.--Kubigula (talk) 17:26, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It links to "mass customization", because that was created first, not because it is correct. Standard rules, non North American article or reference use Standard English. "Snorkel | Talk" 17:32, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]