Difference between revisions of "Talk:Onkyo"

m (Mai 2016 nochmal etwas versachlicht)
m (Mai 2016 nochmal etwas versachlicht)
 
(8 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
Nunja, besonders objektiv ist der Abschnitt Forschung und Historie ja nicht gerade...
+
Well, the research and history section is not exactly objective...
  
  
Nee, stammt wohl aus einem Werbeprospekt...
+
No, probably comes from an advertising brochure...
  
== Mai 2016 nochmal etwas versachlicht ==
+
== May 2016 again somewhat objectified ==
  
Schaun wir mal, ob die Onkyo-Freaks diese jetzt nicht mehr 1:1 von der Seite gardi.de-Seite stammende Variante ertragen können.
+
Let's see if the Onkyo freaks can stand this now no longer 1:1 from the page gardi.de page.
  
Freundliche Grüße, Analoghatwas
+
Kind regards, Analoghatwas
 +
 
 +
 
 +
: Dear Charly, today (June 8, 2018) you have added here again promotional textual passages. Here it concerns however a wiki, compare that calmly times with the Wikipedia. Some of it I've clarified, some passages would have to be worded more factually again. Since I would like no Edit was, now here this reference. It would be best if you could adjust the flowery passages yourself.
 +
 
 +
:" ''Hardly any other manufacturer in the HiFi industry can show a development like Onkyo. ''" Could you please justify this factually? I would delete this sentence, because in my opinion the deeper content is missing.
 +
 
 +
Or " ''In addition to new innovative products'': what are they?
 +
 
 +
: "''exclusive technical concepts'':" Are the concepts mentioned really 'exclusive'? Does no competitor have anything comparable and is thus also far behind Onkyo, especially in terms of sound quality?
 +
 
 +
I would also like to question the section on contemporary history: does it really matter in which year which national company was founded?  Surely that can be presented in a more compact way . . .
 +
 
 +
: History section in a nutshell: ''regain its reputation as a .... regain'', how does that work?, or some ''extremely competent audio components'': when is an audio component ''extremely competent''??
 +
 
 +
: Very much hope for your understanding or info here on the discussion page. MfG--[[User:Analoghatwas|Analoghatwas]] ([[User Discussion:Analoghatwas|Discussion]]) 20:00, 8 Jun 2018 (CEST)

Latest revision as of 14:53, 8 June 2018

Well, the research and history section is not exactly objective...


No, probably comes from an advertising brochure...

May 2016 again somewhat objectified[edit]

Let's see if the Onkyo freaks can stand this now no longer 1:1 from the page gardi.de page.

Kind regards, Analoghatwas


Dear Charly, today (June 8, 2018) you have added here again promotional textual passages. Here it concerns however a wiki, compare that calmly times with the Wikipedia. Some of it I've clarified, some passages would have to be worded more factually again. Since I would like no Edit was, now here this reference. It would be best if you could adjust the flowery passages yourself.
" Hardly any other manufacturer in the HiFi industry can show a development like Onkyo. " Could you please justify this factually? I would delete this sentence, because in my opinion the deeper content is missing.

Or " In addition to new innovative products: what are they?

"exclusive technical concepts:" Are the concepts mentioned really 'exclusive'? Does no competitor have anything comparable and is thus also far behind Onkyo, especially in terms of sound quality?

I would also like to question the section on contemporary history: does it really matter in which year which national company was founded? Surely that can be presented in a more compact way . . .

History section in a nutshell: regain its reputation as a .... regain, how does that work?, or some extremely competent audio components: when is an audio component extremely competent??
Very much hope for your understanding or info here on the discussion page. MfG--Analoghatwas (Discussion) 20:00, 8 Jun 2018 (CEST)