Talk:IPod advertising

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

On 22 February 2007, IPod advertising was linked from Digg, a high-traffic website. All prior and subsequent edits are noted in the revision history.

Contents 1 Bullet point discussion 2 How did they do it 3 Non-Silhouette Ads 4 original style used again 5 Merger 6 Move: iPod advertising 7 Another iPod ad 8 U2 ad

[edit] Bullet point discussion

• Why was the article reverted without explanation to a mucher poorer written and punctuated version? Nohat 29 June 2005 04:40 (UTC)
• Reverted to restore picture that was inadvertantly deleted. Was on a hurry and forgot to edit. Do apologize for this. --Arbiteroftruth 30 June 2005 06:53 (UTC)

• The iPod commercial with The Vines' "Ride" that I know of wasn't a dancing silhouette one. Was it also used in a silhouette commercial? Also, adding a couple of songs that I know were silhouette ads. Chatoyant 15:52, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

• Chatoyant, that was a dancing silhouette, but it is different than the ones made later, with music from Gorillaz and The Caesars. The silhouettes were dancing in the posters that was put up on the city streets. Arbiteroftruth 22:05, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

• Does anyone know about the posters of the abu graib prison torture pictures in Ipod silhouette style with iRaq under it? It was an art piece by a protester. I would like to know more about that. --Sirkeg 04:08, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How did they do it

How did they make these ads? Like how did they make the actual ads... thanks!

Perhaps you could ask the people at Logan ;) I've just added info on the producers of the colourful dancers ads. Ahmedbadr3 17:02, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

in references in pop culture what about david chapelles spoof on itunes and apple in an episode of the chapelle's show.

[edit] Non-Silhouette Ads

Why are the the ads for iPod/iTunes that don't have any silhouettes also listed here? For example, the one with the buildings made of album art that form a tornado to the tune of "Cubicle" by Rinôçérôse. It's especially confusing when on the Rinôçérôse album page it says "The song Cubicle was used in an Apple iPod Silhouette Commercial." I thought it was an error, but the ad is listed on this page. --Muéro 00:21, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps this article should be about iPod ads in general, instead of being exclusively about the silhouettes. There was an early ad for the first generation iPod [1] featuring "Take California" by The Propellerheads. -Gordeonbleu 03:55, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

As the person who originally created the page, I have never imagined the changes in the commercials in two years. I move to change the title of this page to "Apple iPod commercials" or "Apple iPod promotions", so that we can reflect the other campaigns better. Aye or nay? Arbiteroftruth 04:45, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] original style used again

so i saw that they had a new commercial again which used the original style again and realized this probably wasnt updated yet so i did,

james purdy, 69.255.63.86 04:41, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merger

Support The Article content will not shange if it is collaborated with other apple campaigns - it will only become easier to find. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.59.112.101 (talk) 01:42, 11 December 2006 (UTC).

Move to strike the vote made by 203.59.112.101.- IP users cannot vote in elections. Only registered users can. Arbiteroftruth 03:27, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't think this is an actual policy. Can you point me towards something that supports this view? --Chan-Ho (Talk) 10:03, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Even if we were to allow the vote, whose voice does it represent? IPs recycle, and it is hard for me to believe that whoever made that vote is still using that IP. Therefore, I move to strike. If that user wants to vote under a REAL user account, then it is different. Arbiteroftruth 11:40, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't see how it is different. I have no idea who the ip is, but neither do I know who you are. Even if you had stopped using your account, your comments would still be valid, and I see no reason why the same can't be true for the IP. Also, your comments on "move to strike" are misguided. There's no such thing. Somebody determining consensus after some period of time may choose to disregard some comments (e.g. as coming from possible sockpuppets or not compatible with policy), but you don't get to "vote" to invalidate someone else's comments. This is an open discussion forum...comments are countered with other other comments, not parliamentary procedures. --Chan-Ho (Talk) 19:01, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Chan-Ho, what I mean to say is that when an IP votes, does it represent the opinions of User A, or other users whose opinions might (and more likely than not) differ from User A? With a username, the opinions of, say, me, still represents me in all circumstances until I retract them. This is why I believe if that IP user wants to vote with a username, I will allow it, but for now, we should disregard his opinion on the grounds that we don't know who the opinion speaks for. Arbiteroftruth 16:34, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Oppose: There is a separate article for the recent "Get a Mac" ads, and this should be no different. Arbiteroftruth 03:27, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Oppose: I saw what the Apple commercials page looked like after everything was put on it. It was incredibly long. I think having short summaries of the major campaigns in that article, while having main articles separate is a good decision. Also, the iPod advertising campaign has a cohesiveness about it which makes it suitable for its own article; some will only be interested in the iPod advertising and want the level of detail an individual article can provide. --Chan-Ho (Talk) 10:03, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Support Each distinct campaign should have their own article and there should be one summary advertising article that covers all of Apple's products. No need for a specific iPod or Mac advertising article outside of specific, notable campaigns. Paul^C/_T+ 22:54, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

This sounds more like an oppose than support merge. My reasoning above is very similar to yours. The iPod commercials thus far have been part of a systematic campaign and just as worthy for its own page as the "Get a Mac" campaign. I personally thought the old title for this article was fine, as Apple has not deviated too far from the "silhouette" idea. What is being proposed is that all this stuff get put into the general Apple commercial page, or that some of it does and the rest cut. And I think that would be a shame. --Chan-Ho (Talk) 15:13, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

2 Oppose, 1 Support, and 1 invalid vote. Voting has closed on this matter, and the verdict is Oppose Merge.

[edit] Move: iPod advertising

I think that the word "Apple" in the title is extraneous and unnecessary, and the page should be moved to iPod advertising. There is a precedent: Apple Macintosh was moved to Macintosh.--HereToHelp 00:51, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with that idea. Attempts to change the ipod article to apple ipod failed as well and I see no reason why it should be different here. There are no other ipods to confuse this with eiher so the use of the word Apple is not needed. --69.156.206.48 02:13, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

• Support Consistent with other iPod pages. 205.157.110.11 03:14, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I've moved the page, and removed the listing at WP:RM. Cheers. -GTBacchus^(talk) 21:06, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Another iPod ad

Is it worth mentioning the ad which reprised the 1984 Mac introduction ad, and added iPod headphones to the runner? Can't recall any additional details, so I'm putting this in Talk and not the article. Jeffr 18:02, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] U2 ad

The article says "iPods did not feature in the [U2] advert," but I remember seeing both iPods and white instrument cords. They may have been only in the extended version. Does anyone have the ad to check? Sdalmonte 06:48, 17 February 2007 (UTC)