Preview image. Unlock full-res
Cream slide on choosing the right noun, pairing a bold sans headline and body copy with serif "we are / we are not" examples struck through in terracotta.
Summary
A messaging page titled "Words matter" that prescribes the firm's preferred noun, contrasting an approved serif phrase against two crossed-out alternatives.
Visual description
Cream background, header "1.5 / Our noun / Verbal identity". The bold sans headline "Words matter" sits upper-left, with two short sans body paragraphs beneath explaining why the noun matters. To the right, three serif phrases are stacked: "We are an interdisciplinary design firm" (approved), and below it "We are not an architecture and design firm" and "We are not an architecture firm", the two rejected lines crossed through with a thin terracotta diagonal stroke. Underlined italic "are" and "are not" emphasize the distinction. Lower-left navigation rail with "Our noun" arrowed; footer rule below.
Key takeaway
The do/don't device done in prose: one approved phrase set plainly, the wrong ones struck through with a single colored line. Using the brand's own terracotta for the strikethrough keeps even the "no" examples on-brand, and underlining the pivotal words ("are", "are not") makes the rule unmissable.
Reuse notes
A clean way to legislate naming, terminology, or copy preferences anywhere a brand cares about specific wording. The colored strikethrough reads instantly as "do not use". Keep the approved option visually dominant (here, no strike, italic emphasis) so readers default to it. Reusable across any verbal-style page that distinguishes right from wrong usage.
From this deck: Words matter preferred noun
View deck
