Talk:New bespoke movement

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Eye on the row?[edit]

Tags galore, created by an editor with the name Eyeontherow and its about Saville Row? COI and NPOV. Lots of refs, but very little that can be easily read. Rgds, --Trident13 (talk) 13:50, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi there, I appreciate your comment, but i am in fact a fashion student studying tailoring and this was a point of interest i came upon in my research. As regards references, many are from books i have read, and which are available in hard copy. Could you please give further suggestion as to how i may be able to make this article more neutral in your opinion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eyeontherow (talkcontribs) 12:02, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Did nobody oppose (or mock) what these guys were doing? The article is very favorable towards the movement, with too much of the "breath of fresh air down stodgy old Savile Row" sort of phrasing. We strive for a more neutral, "Just the facts, ma'am" tone here.--Orange Mike | Talk 13:23, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Please could this article now be re-reviewed in its current form. I have made ammendments in attempt to make it more neutral. Eyeontherow (talk) 11:16, 20 July 2010 (UTC)Eyeontherow
Was there an article in Vanity Fair about these guys? That would seem like a good source, if it exists? I'd also like to see anything that appeared in that era from those who were critical or even dismissive of the movement. Surely it encountered some resistance? --Orange Mike | Talk 14:53, 20 July 2010 (UTC) not a candidate for bespoke
I have made some further adjustments, and would again really appreciate your comments, they are very constuctive, thank you. Regarding resistance though there is little evidence, that i can find, of any concerted opposition, it appears as an accepted progression? Thnk you again. Eyeontherow (talk) 15:09, 21 July 2010 (UTC)Eyeontherow
Would still like to see the Vanity Fair article when they appeared on the cover; that sort of coverage, as opposed to sites like that of the SVBA, are more valuable sources, as likely to be more neutral. Also: could you go through and convert dates to include the text names of months, to avoid potential confusion? '4 May 2010' is far less likely to cause cross-Atlantic imbroglios than '04-05-10'. I also invite you to take a look at how I reformatted a couple of those references to the SVBA website. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:09, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Right i have added further vanity fair referncing and altered the date format, please could you now give me your renewed opinion- sorry ths is taking up your time. Thank you again for all your help. Eyeontherow (talk) 10:43, 27 July 2010 (UTC)