Talk:Gucci
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the Fashion WikiProject. Please work to improve this article, or visit our project page to find other ways of helping. Thanks! |
||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. |
||
| High | This article is on a subject of high-importance within fashion. | ||
|
Article Grading: The following comments were left by the quality and importance raters: (edit · refresh) B-Class: Would be close to a GA if it was fully referenced and had more pictures. Top-importance due to prestige of brand and venerability. Daniel Case 03:59, 28 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
 |
Gucci is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. See comments | |
| High | This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. | |
 |
This article is within the scope of Companies WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of companies. If you would like to participate please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. | |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating assessment scale. | |
Where in the article can we fit in this Gucci advertisment?--Greasysteve13 06:31, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
It's pretty Risque if u ask me.. --Adam Wang 00:22, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
- We don't censor here. However I don't think it represents the Gucci brand as well as the simple logo. And it would be Unexpected for visitors to find it here. --Darkfred Talk to me 01:33, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not saying about censor.. I'm just saying its innappropriate for little kids. I wouldn't want my kids seeing that.. agree with the "represenation" point above. --Adam Wang 02:06, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- In addition, it violates the wikipedia image policy in terms of fair use anyway. Calwatch 21:19, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
-
Any chance of 'seeking and destroying' the idiot vandals on this page?
Contents |
[edit] External link
I was blocked trying to add an external link to a non-e-selling website showing Gucci accessories collections. This additional information is relevant for Wikipedian readers. Could you allow it to be published ?
- You have tried to post a commercial site for these products. Although it may seem they are showing a "collection" of the se designer products, the page clearly states the following on the top of the linked pages:
- "To get the prices, please sign in or register"
- It is a nice way of "hiding" the true purpose of the link, but the promotion of business web sites or the sale of products on the Internet is not allowed per Wikipedia guidelines. Thank you -- CZmarlin 17:42, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Dear Cz Marlin, You probably visited very quickly this site, which is an information guide that presents actual collections of every luxury brands, like are style.com or stylefinder.com, if you succeed to buy something on it, let me know, you will be the first.
Actually, if you want to see the store prices of the products (That you can't find in Gucci's corporate website), you must register, it is the midway condition given by gucci, dior, cartierand other luxury brands...to avoid broadcasting too widely their prices on the net.
You can try to get information from fashion bloggers, they often refer to this website when they want to show the luxury brands accessories collections, as they refer to style.com when they want to show the brands ready-to-wear and haute couture collections. Moreover, you can go and see the Prestigium.com article on the french Wikipedia : Prestigium.com. After this, if you really believe that showing Gucci accessories collections is not a relevant information for wikipedian interested in Gucci, it is your point of view. Thank you dear Cz Marlin for the time you're spending, I hope this will enlight you.
[edit] Split
I suggest this article be split into two articles:
- 1. Gucci, regarding the fashion label, and
- 2. Guccio Gucci, the fashion designer.
--WoodElf 13:31, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
- I obviously agree.--Supparluca 19:26, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
-
- I agree that it should be split into the two articles — CZmarlin 20:19, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
There's no need at the moment. An article on the fashion company can have a section on the biography of the fashion designer in a section within the main article. That's fine. If and when the biography section becomes too large is the time to break it out in summary style. SilkTork *SilkyTalk 22:12, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Gucci.svg
Image:Gucci.svg 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 04:58, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Needs cleanup
There are a couple of weird sentences that someone should clarify, for example:
"His wife Aida Calvelli had a large family, six children in all, though only his sons—Vasco, Aldo, Ugo, and Rodolfo—would play a role in leading the company."
Does this means Gucci and his wife had six children or that his wife had six children from a previous relationship?
"At the time, brothers Aldo and Rodolfo controlled equal 50% shares of the company, though contributed less to the company than he and his sons did."
Again, who's sons are we talking about?
"It did not take long before ravaged the company’s pomp by flooding the market with cheap knockoffs, further tarnishing the Gucci name."
Who did this?
"Maurizio allied with Aldo’s son Paolo to gain control of the Board of Directors and established the Gucci Licensing division in the Netherlands for purposes."
What purposes?
There might be more, but I spotted these. I'd fix it myself, but I have no idea what the sentences are supposed to mean. Twinzor (talk) 14:22, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
