Talk:Revenge buying

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Theleekycauldron (talk) 13:11, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

Created by RAJIVVASUDEV (talk). Self-nominated at 05:54, 24 November 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Gave this a major copyedit. New enough, long enough, largely neutral and sourcing is pretty good. However, Forbes contributors are self-published sources and cannot be cited except if the author is a world-renowned subject-matter expert (Blake Morgan does not fit that bill, currently). I noticed a lot of broad-brush statements in the explanation section which I attempted to fix with the proper attributive clauses. However, since the second sentence in the "Explanation" section cites a combination of an academic journal and Forbes, and the Forbes article is unreliable, the sentence will need to be rewritten with proper attribution to the academics, removing any bits that are paraphrased from the Forbes source.
If you need any help feel free to {{ping}} me, @RAJIVVASUDEV:. DigitalIceAge (talk) 22:21, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @DigitalIceAge: I have made the necessary corrections. Kindly see. Regards RV (talk) 05:58, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi @RAJIVVASUDEV: The changes are largely good, I appreciate it! I did remove the etymology section as I'm not sure "retaliatory rage or vengeance" fully encompasses the range of emotions that people might have when committing "revenge buying". Indeed the cited source Zourrig et al 2009 seems to give some alternative, more sociological and less emotionally charged frameworks for "revenge", but as the source is paywalled I can't fully paraphrase it. I also removed an image I found confusing and not very enlightening ("Retail suffered 40–60% drop in footfall" (?)). I do think I've contributed too much to the article at this point, so I'll be handing it off to a new reviewer for fresh eyes. The article does reads a whole lot better, keep up the good work. DigitalIceAge (talk) 07:36, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Further review. Nice work. Interesting article. Read it through a few times and think it looks good. One question that jumped out at me is: Is it correct to attribute all of the academic insights to "sociologists", or is it more accurate to say that some of the sources are "psychologists" or "psychiatrists" or "social psychiatrists" or "social psychologists"? (Maybe the answer is different per source? I haven't looked closely at the actual sources.) Earwig says no copyvio and QPQ is done. Hook needs a bit more work for both readability and accuracy. (And I do think we need to consider the fact that COVID-19 restrictions in China are back and that there were protests, etc. – so even the "revenge buying" has turned into "panic selling" – maybe we need to specify that the hook and article are about "2020"?) @RAJIVVASUDEV:@DigitalIceAge: How is this? Any other thoughts hook-wise?
*ALT1 ... that revenge buying occurred after the lockdown was lifted in 2020 in China and helped Hermès, a French fashion luxury brand, record $2.7 million in sales in Guangzhou in a single day? @DigitalIceAge:, @Cielquiparle: Please see if all issues are addressed. Thanks RV (talk) 16:56, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@RAJIVVASUDEV: Thanks for the fixes to the article. I think all we need is final wording on the hook and approval from at least one more editor. I think ALT1 adds too many connecting words, so I'm now wondering if the following works.
*ALT1a ... revenge buying after lockdown lifted in 2020 helped Hermès, a French fashion luxury brand, record $2.7 million in sales in Guangzhou, China, in a single day?

Could someone please check hook ALT1a (and/or the others)? Once it's approved, I think we're good to go. The source is this Economic Times article. Cielquiparle (talk) 20:38, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • If going by the previous review that everything else checks out, I'm just looking at ALT1a here; I think it needs a few more words to make sure it's fully-understandable on a first read (or a rephrase, or both; may I suggest either "that revenge buying after COVID-19 lockdown was lifted in 2020..." or "that after a 2020 COVID-19 lockdown was lifted, revenge buying..."). I also want to ask if it needs to name Hermès - the context of a fashion brand would still stand, but without the covert promotion - and if $2.7 million in a day in a metropolis is actually impressive? Also, I think you misspelled Guangzhou. Kingsif (talk) 00:13, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Kingsif: Thanks for the feedback! (Quickly fixed the Guangzhou misspelling above so there's no way that gets replicated.) I actually think naming Hermès gives it color, but in light of your other feedback, what do you think of these?
  • ALT1b: ... that revenge buying after a COVID-19 lockdown was lifted in 2020 helped the Hermès flagship store in Guangzhou set a record for largest sales at a luxury outlet in China in a single day?
  • ALT1c: ... that after a COVID-19 lockdown was lifted in 2020, revenge buying helped the Hermès flagship store in Guangzhou set a record for most shopping at a luxury outlet in China in a single day? Cielquiparle (talk) 00:55, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I like both of those, the context especially - adds a lot in understanding without too many more words. Happy to go with alt1b or alt1c, with a preference for b. Kingsif (talk) 00:57, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Revenge_buying&oldid=1208350457"