Jump to content

Talk:Chanel

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Kuru (talk | contribs) at 21:42, 31 May 2024 (Reverted edit by 105.168.83.70 (talk) to last version by 175.157.25.149). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 1 April 2019 and 5 June 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kattiekattt.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 17:10, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite

I recently re-wrote the entire article, added an image of the logo and greatly expanded a previously mediocre piece of information. Please feel free to add.--Speedway 18:03, May 14, 2005 (UTC)

should note that chanel was very popular disgner in the 1920s before marylin was around little black dress was a flapper dress jasmine rose in chanel number 5 are now very popular note in perfume. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.24.51.238 (talk) 21:39, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Original handbag history

The reason behind the small zipper on the flap: This is where Coco kept her love letters to read as a reminder of her lovers. The reason behind the small pocket on the back of the purse: This is where she kept her tip money. She idolized masculine life style. Their clothes, their wealth, their independents. Although back then, men paid the bills; she rebelled and immitated their actions of paying for bills and tipping the servers and valet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.87.8.166 (talk) 15:50, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chanel 22

Is there such a perfume as Chanel 22 or is it a lie?

Answer: There is a Chanel 22. It used to be sold in department stores, but its available only in the boutiques now.


Plus someone should mention that Marilyn Monroe gave Chanel 5 a VERY big free endorsement

is that true?

Yes, it is true! MM was asked what was her favorite perfume? She answered, Channel #5! I believe it was around the time she was shooting "The Prince And The Showgirl"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.244.188.132 (talk) 03:36, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chanel 2.55

How about adding a photo of the handbag?


yesssssssssss


Or how about a photo of the beautiful Coco?

put something about how the design icon relates to its time? because these are answers i need!

New Edit

I made a complete revision of the article. Please, be free to make edits to grammar, add pictures, etc. --Thepowederoom 08:56, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The information in the article is good, but it still needs to be better organized into more clearly-labeled sections. Additionally, there are no pictures of the brand's iconic suits or purses. There is also no mention of the short "film" (actually a Chanel No. 5 advertisement it created starring Nicole Kidman (and directed by Baz Luhrmann), which I read is the most expensive television "ad" ever produced.

-Vincentanton 01:33, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mismatch information

On the Chanel No.5 entry, it is claimed that there were *six* test fragrances and Mme Chanel chose No. 5. On this page there were only five for her to choose. Which is correct? --Navstar 18:56, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Both versions are wrong, the number of test fragrances was of course much higher, and the only reason for her just to select the vial number 5, was her affinity to the number 5, which she always regarded as her lucky number. At this time she had no idea what kind of scent it was. --193.154.12.69 (talk) 08:36, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

call out!

i really wanted to know if anyone could get hold of the acctual double C sign i want to put it on something and iv looked everywhee so i you email it to me but on my bebo: www.bebo.com/-FREAK-x thanks x


Minor Edit

I tweaked the Chanel No. 5 film section a bit and added a couple wikilinks.Second crimson 03:02, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Chanel logo.PNG

Image:Chanel logo.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 05:01, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Cleaned up a piece of Wikivandalism.

- Jennifer —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.225.35.223 (talk) 10:22, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. boutiques

I don't think that the "U.S. boutiques list" should stay in the article. It appears to be propaganda and the term "fashionable cities " doesn't seem encyclopedic.Yamanbaiia 17:41, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Chanel.jpg

Image:Chanel.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:41, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Peacock terms

Having read this piece, I'm trying to figure out what the "peacock terms" are. I'm not all that fashion knowledgeable but it seems pretty straight forward to me. Are the "peacock terms" the names of some of the people mentioned?

Thank you. I hope I put this in the correct place. Danu6403 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danu6403 (talk • contribs) 19:25, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Read WP:Peacock. dougweller (talk) 21:25, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

remembering era of Coco

The years of the 1920s and 1930s will best be remembered as the era of Coco whose simpler lines of women's couture led to the popular "flat-chested" look of the 1920s.

Will be? When? And by who? My grandparents? I can't say they have too many years left, so they better start remembering. 71.155.241.19 (talk) 05:33, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

vandalism

Number or locations: 1/2 Industry: food —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.129.78.157 (talk) 14:47, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Establishment and recognition..."

The first two paragraphs of this section are disjointed and need to be revised with additional context/background added. Several people are referred to without previous introduction in the article--Balsan, "Erica" (no idea who this was), and "he" who met with "a businesswoman" in Chicago at 5:15... HUH???Rep07 (talk) 17:43, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Toilet water

There are two places in the article where Chanel perfumes are described as "toilet water". Is that subtle vandalism that escaped detection? 61.102.1.48 (talk) 12:28, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, but no, the language is correct there. "Toilet water" is a synonym for Eau de toilette, a lighter variation on perfume. I added the trademark sourcing, but I'm not sure I formatted correctly. Would appreciate the help if someone could take a look! Metabrarian (talk) 04:33, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chanel model suit 2009.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Chanel model suit 2009.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 17 November 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 07:10, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Copyedit

Upon request, hit this, pretty hard. The main move was to cut acres of redundant, flowery context and break up long, convoluted sentences. Other comments:

- There's no need to reference the same source repeatedly in a single paragraph, unless other refs are present.

- The lede should better balance the origins of the firm and its modern-day incarnation.

- It wasn't clear to me from the text whether Chanel emulated Dior, or maintained the original no-hourglass approach.

- Was she the mistress of the two men at the same time or did she switch?

- Lots of red links. I didn't remove them, but someone should.

Cheers. Lfstevens (talk) 01:13, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reply:

Had you read critically, you would not ask such silly questions . . . she was mistress to both men, simulateously and at the same time. "Individuals", rather than "women"? Oh well, the groupthink mentality again justifies dumbing down a history article. I'll wait for you to finish, and revert it to the adult narrative. If you do not know the differences between Chanel and Dior, and their competition, what are you doing here? Don't you like girls? Don't you like prettiness? Hurry up and finish the dumbing down, so that the adult narrative can be restored. The "product catalogue" IS THE SUBJECT of this CORPORATE HISTORY article. Your commercialese language is poorly integrated.

64.107.183.202 (talk) 18:19, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback, I think. The text did not make the timing of her relationships clear. "Simultaneously" was not in there. I don't follow fashion, copyeditors often don't follow the topics they work on. If the catalog is the subject, why are we reading about lovers? I am finished, so go for it. Cheers. Lfstevens (talk) 04:26, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New page - Paraffection - Chanel subidiary company

I've created a page on subsidiary company Paraffection. Should it be added to the Navbox? (Eartha78 (talk) 00:39, 28 September 2012 (UTC))[reply]

I looked at the article, it's a nice one - good start! I did make a few tweaks and copy edits. I can see why it should be added to the Navbox, although am not sure where exactly it should go. Certainly do add the Chanel Navbox to Paraffection. Mabalu (talk) 03:36, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for having a look, glad to be able to contribute! May need to add a group for subsidiaries to Navbox and then create article for Eres, Holland & Holland etc... What do you think?(Eartha78 (talk) 04:53, 28 September 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Chanel/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

B-Class: Comprehensive enough but needs inline references. Top-importance as one of the premiere fashion houses in the world. Daniel Case 03:03, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 03:03, 28 March 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 11:15, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Chanel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:33, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chanel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:09, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. Community Tech bot (talk) 21:07, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Post Coco era needs expansion

Post Coco era stops at 2003, gallery is very limited and some other parts need expansion too. Chanel acquired brands in meantime and expanded in numerous directions.AugustusMarbleBoy (talk) 20:46, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Factually incorrect information that requires updating


  • What I think should be changed (include citations):

The Chanel article has a number of factual errors and out of date information that require updating.

1. Business Type: Private Limited Company This has changed from S.A.S. since Chanel moved their HQ to London in 2018. https://fashionunited.uk/news/business/chanel-moves-staff-to-global-hub-in-london/2018091438921

2. Industry: Luxury Goods This should be updated a they do more than fashion, as this would be the same as the article for Dior. Ref: https://luxe.digital/business/digital-luxury-trends/chanel-from-hats-to-haute-couture/

3. Founded 1910 (as House of Chanel) Incorrectly showing as 1909 Ref: https://www.hautehistory.co.uk/chanel-timeline/house-history-the-chanel-timeline

4. Headquarters: London, UK Incorrectly showing as Neuilly-sur-Seine, France https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45517279


5. Key People:

- Leena Nair, Global CEO

- Virginie Viard, Creative Director Fashion

- Olivier Polge, Master Perfumer

- Arnaud Chastaingt, Director of the Watchmaking Creation Studio

- Patrice Leguereau, Director of the Fine Jewelry Creation Studio

Out of date key people listed. Ref: https://www.reuters.com/business/retail-consumer/french-fashion-house-chanel-appoints-unilever-executive-leena-nair-ceo-2021-12-14/ Ref: https://www.lexpress.fr/styles/mode/virginie-viard-succede-a-karl-lagerfeld-chez-chanel_2063068.html


6. Logo Incorrect logo is being used in article.


  • Why it should be changed:

Information on the page is factually incorrect and out of date. References show new information.

Occasionalpedestrian (talk) 10:57, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Occasionalpedestrian here - https://www.forbes.com/companies/chanel - it says HQ Neuilly-sur-Seine. Renat 12:40, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for flagging @RenatUK, Their location is wrong on the Forbes site as well so I will get this changed. Thanks for changing the founded date. Are you able to make the other changes for business type, key people and industry?
@Occasionalpedestrian Please see WP:INDENT and sign your posts on talk pages, using four tildes (~~~~), or clicking the signature icon on the edit toolbar. Per Template:Infobox company "Key people" should be up to four key individuals closely associated with the company. --Renat 13:12, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for directing me to WP:INDENT, this is useful to know. Also thank for making those changes, I didn't realise key people was limited to 4 so that is also good to know. Occasionalpedestrian (talk) 11:29, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I can see the article now contradicts itself as it is referenced in the post-Coco era section that Chanel moved their HQ to London in 2018 (ref 21), and that Leena Nair was appointed Global CEO in 2021. The two inaccuracies need to be updated in the info box. 1. Headquarters should be London. 2. Leena Nair's job title should be Global Chief Executive Officer (ref 25). @RenatUK Thanks for your help before, are you able to give your view on this? Occasionalpedestrian (talk) 10:55, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
HQ location now changed to London on Forbes https://www.forbes.com/companies/chanel. Forbes have limited industry categories, and packaged goods is the closest they have so this is still the same. Luxury Goods is a better descriptor of their industry and should be changed on Wikipedia Occasionalpedestrian (talk) 09:53, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

Factually incorrect information in infobox


  • What I think should be changed:

The following information is showing incorrectly in the infobox

Headquarters: This should be London [1]

Key People: Leena Nair (Global Chief Executive Officer). Need to add the word "Global" to her job title.

Industry: This should be Luxury Goods

  • Why it should be changed:

Factually incorrect information should be updated


Occasionalpedestrian (talk) 12:13, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

People:  Already done; Industry:  Not done: per linked reference; Headquarters:  Already done. With those three comments, I will close the request tag.
Courtesy ping: Occasionalpedestrian (please ping on reply)Happy Editing--IAmChaos 17:20, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.forbes.com/companies/chanel/

@RenatUK - Thank you for your help before. Are you able to help make the change this time please? Occasionalpedestrian (talk) 12:14, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Out of date information in infobox


Hello, it is Chanel’s conflict of interest editor here again. Chanel have released their financial results and a there are some inaccurate stats in the Chanel infobox.

  • What I think should be changed:

The following information is showing incorrectly in the infobox:


Revenue - $15.6 billion for 2021 [1] [2] [3]

Net income - $4.03 billion for 2021 [4]

No of employees – 28,500 at the end of 2021 [5]

Number of locations: 523 stores [6]


  • Why it should be changed:

Out of date information should be updated


Occasionalpedestrian (talk) 14:05, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Ptrnext (talk) 06:49, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Chanel releases full 2021 results". Retrieved 17 June 2022.
  2. ^ "Chanel Reports $15.6 Billion in Revenue in 2021, With Boost from Price Hikes". Retrieved 17 June 2022.
  3. ^ "Chanel sounds upbeat note despite China lockdowns". Retrieved 17 June 2022.
  4. ^ "Despite Chanel's record sales in 2021, the luxury sector is plunging back into uncertainty". Retrieved 17 June 2022.
  5. ^ "Despite Chanel's record sales in 2021, the luxury sector is plunging back into uncertainty". Retrieved 17 June 2022.
  6. ^ "Despite Chanel's record sales in 2021, the luxury sector is plunging back into uncertainty". Retrieved 17 June 2022.

Incorrect information regarding Russia-Ukraine

Hello, I am an editor with a COI to Chanel flagging some incorrect information on the page. The section that states Chanel have continued to do business in Russia since the start of the war with Ukraine is incorrect. Chanel have stopped doing business in Russia and have even gone as far as to stop selling to Russian buyers outside of their borders. This has been widely reported in the following places:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/04/07/opinion/companies-ukraine-boycott.html?login=email&auth=login-email

https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN2L12C7/

https://fr.fashionnetwork.com/news/Ukraine-chanel-applique-l-embargo-aussi-aux-russes-en-dehors-de-la-russie,1394353.html

https://www.bfmtv.com/economie/entreprises-francaises-en-russie-ou-en-est-on-un-an-apres_AV-202302260097.html

https://www.lefigaro.fr/societes/lvmh-hermes-et-chanel-ferment-temporairement-leurs-boutiques-en-russie-20220304 Occasionalpedestrian (talk) 14:17, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For transparency, I was solicited on my talk page by the above COI editor. That said, the material added in this edit by an IP was sourced to a tweet. A claim like that should be backed up with a solid and reliable source. Several of the sources above, including the NYT, do seem to indicate at least a suspension of activities. For the moment at least, I've removed that material as not supported, and it would be best to get a consensus here before re-adding any claims like that. Sam Kuru (talk) 02:30, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks for making this change Occasionalpedestrian (talk) 11:11, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Français

Les persons parlent le français 175.157.25.149 (talk) 12:52, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chanel&oldid=1226629558"