Talk:Burberry

Chavs?

What about Burberry's role in Chav culture?

Chavs are mentioned and linked in the "UK. Image Problems and Revitalization" section. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 18:03, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PETA protest against Burberry in NYC

Someone keep removing material from the article about the the boycott of Burberry. The material is properly sourced to newsmedia. Someone said it's irrelevant. I added newsmedia source to show it is relevant. He also said that the website is not npov. I agree so I removed it. Someone else said that the material is NPOV. The material only say that Burberry is the target of an international boycott. I think NPOV would be saying the boycott is justified/not justified. The material doesn't say that, it only say that the boycott exist. It would be great if a moderator could look at it and say if it's NPOV or not. I think someone wants to hide the boycott because they they don't like it or because they like Burberry too much.

You and the other party are involved in an editing dispute; neither of you is a vandal. It really isn't a wikipedia admin's job to settle your dispute, to figure out what is or isn't NPOV, or to tell off the other. Admins are blunt instruments: you really don't one involved. You guys need to work together to solve the matter. Talk a look at the sage advice at Wikipedia:Resolving disputes. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 20:10, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As a regular editor of this page, I agree with the numerous people who have reduced or removed your PETA-related content. PETA is a very worthy cause, the only big problem with adding PETA-related content to the Burberry article is that many, many clothing manufacturers use fur, and every upscale clothier article doesn't need a couple redundant paragraphs about PETA. PETA's actions should be primarily discussed on PETA's article, on existing fur criticism articles (which I've noticed you've also edited), and possibly on specific articles about BloodyBurberry.com and related sites. But until there's more to it than a 4-person protest in NYC, I don't believe the topic deserves a mention here. Jonemerson 22:06, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, please log-in so we can communicate with you better. You currently seem to be hiding behind many logged-in users and numeric IPs, which is not helping your case. Jonemerson 22:06, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For your information, I've been insulted many time because of my editing at PETA in the past, that's why I wasn't editing logged in. Come to think of it, I just broke my 1rr revert parole. I might as well note it on my talk page :) Jean-Philippe 22:20, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Peta has protested against the use of fur by numerous fashion labels, including J.Crew, Ralph Lauren, Versace, Valentino, JP Gaultier, Marc Jacobs, Michael Kors, Oscar de la Renta, Lagerfeld, and Brooks Brothers. But these actions are relatively minor footnotes in the history of those companies / designers - as are the current protests against Burberry - and as such, should not rate a mention in this encyclopaedia. Allegations of "animal abuse" are unsubstantiated - on its 'Bloody Burberry' website, Peta provides no proof that the animals from which Burberry sources its fur are "skinned alive" or otherwise abused, yet this is strongly inferred by that site, and on Wikipedia, mentions of this sort of abuse are routinely added by Peta supporters. Given Burberry's long history, Peta's campaign is of minimal relevance, and should not be given such (emotionally charged, accusatory, biased) prominence on Wikipedia. Barker1975 02:29, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Burberry's response to PETA's boycott

"As a luxury brand, there will be occasions where the use of fur will be considered important to the design and aesthetics of a product," said Laura Cummings, director of Brunswick Group press relations, which represents Burberry.

"In those circumstances, (Burberry) will continue to use fur," she said. [1]

Jonemerson I was typing as you did :) The boycott isn't a "4 person" boycott as you say. Peta is very large organization with almost a million member and Burberry will be hurt very badly by the boycott. But it's just speculation and if everyone think it's not good I won't add it anymore. Jean-Philippe 22:17, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was a four person protest. While the boycott is larger, the majority of the text in the Criticism section was related to the protest. Jonemerson 22:55, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't write any of it, I just provided appropriate references and removed the website. It does seem broader context was lost when you trimmed it earlier [2]. Anyway, I won't be sticking my nose into that matter anymore, see my talk page to know why :) Jean-Philippe 23:12, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I think the protests and boycotts are very relevant. It's not like putting them in there accuses Burberrys of anything, it's international news and should be included. GingerGin 00:18, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PETA campaign persists

I think the campaign is persistent enough by now to be included, so I've tried to describe it in a way neutral enough to satisfy previous opponents. SeL 11:25, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the PETA propaganda. They don't like fur, we get it. This is an encyclopedia not an editorial forum or a blog. This info, if it belongs in the encyclopedia at all, should be in the PETA article. K1ng l0v3 13:20, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here's what I wrote in the article: "In autumn 2006, animal rights organisation PETA made Burberry the focus of an international campaign, which is ongoing as of April 2007, over the continued use of fur in their clothing. The campaign has involved catwalk protests at fashion shows, appearances in front of Burberry stores, and a dedicated website." Could you please explain why that is propaganda? In your edit comment, you wrote: "removed nongermane cruft, keep your commie peta agenda out of the encyclopedia please". Sounds to me like you are trying to suppress a view you don't like, rather than upholding encyclopedia standards.