Talk:Giada (brand)

project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
	This article was accepted from this draft on 24 September 2019 by reviewer Missvain (talk · contribs).

Brands

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Italy

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. An editor has requested that a photo be added to this article.

Fashion

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fashion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fashion on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FashionWikipedia:WikiProject FashionTemplate:WikiProject Fashionfashion articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

	Women in Red: #1day1woman (2019)
This article was created or improved during the #1day1woman initiative hosted by the Women in Red project in 2019. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in RedWikipedia:WikiProject Women in RedTemplate:WikiProject Women in RedWomen in Red articles

The WP:COIRESPONSE . Donspore (talk · contribs) has been paid by unknown on behalf of Giada. Their editing has included contributions to this article.

Content reverted and categorized as "spam" - The Andi coat creation is the main brand piece - new restaurant opening - Collection collaboration with Photographers This content is not spam, it is an accurate representation of the page's topic. The sources are also reliable. This content should stay on the page and will add to the completeness and validity of the page.181.176.103.223 (talk) 19:39, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Praxidicae I created an account because maybe that will help with thinking the edits are spam. I am going to revert each edit and can you let me know what is wrong with each of them so I can address accordingly? Thanks! Ecity97 (talk) 20:39, 1 June 2021 (UTC) Just realized that I can't undo the reverted edits one by one so maybe if I add them again you can let me tell me what is "spammy" about them. Thanks!!Ecity97 (talk) 20:43, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOTPROMO as your reason for doing so. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:19, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Just to butt in here with an uneducated question: "what's promotional about 'womenswear'?" Seems fairly neutral to me (unlike the others, and the word "premium"). — JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 10:26, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, JohnFromPinckney, it isn't a word you'd use in ordinary discourse, is it? I mean "the place was a tip, the floor was littered with discarded womenswear"? Don't we normally call the bits of cloth we use to cover our bodies "clothes" or "clothing"? Just my opinion, of course I recognise that your mileage may not be the same. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:09, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion about the use of luxury and womenswear will require some more research, in the meantime I would like to correct some other things that were recently changed. It currently reads that GIADA is a “Chinese brand” when it is in fact an Italian brand. There are several sources that support this ^[1] and ^[2]

Also, the store in Milan was their first store, so not just a "clothing store" and the article used as a citation supports that ^[3]

Would these changes be acceptable? JohnFromPinckney Justlettersandnumbers Elemimele I am discussing here as instructed and look forward to your input. Thank you for taking the time to respond Ecity97 (talk) 16:08, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I don't consider myself an expert on fashion so I don't really want to comment. But definitely finding references is the right way forwards. If any reliable newspaper or well-known, well-respected magazine writes "this is a luxury brand" then you can call it a luxury brand. My comment was a matter of language rather than specific expertise on fashion. In the uk it's quite normal to refer to female clothing as "womenswear" (that's what would be written on the store directory in a department store), so I felt you were within your rights to do the same. And it's also quite normal to refer to a brand of womenswear as "luxury" not as puffery, but merely as an indication that it's the sort of stuff that would sell through a concession in a high-street department store rather than in a budget outlet. Again, the safest option is a good reference using similar language. I looked up ChinaDaily, which WP seems to have some doubts about, because of potential political bias, but acceptable with careful editorial judgement, when a Chinese insight is needed. I'd say if you're looking at whether this brand can make an impact in China, you could use it. Global Times however was deemed an unreliable tabloid, so it isn't. Vanity fair is safe as a source, though the article is going to be full of what looks like puffery because this is the fashion industry we're reporting on... also while foreign language sources are okay, this one doesn't cooperate well with translation on the Edge browser I'm using, so it might irritate some users. But you've got two possible references there, so you're in a better position! This is a good table of sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources Good luck! Elemimele (talk) 17:15, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I don't have any problem with saying "...is an Italian brand of women's clothing", since it was founded in Italy by Italians and operated for 10 years as such, and the 2nd sentence says, "was bought by the Chinese company". That is, the brand is Italian while the company producing it has become Chinese. Probably Justlettersandnumbers will have something to say about this point.

I'm not clear on what your third ("clothing store") point is. Apparently, the company made clothes beginning in 2001 and sold them without a shop of their own, and in 2013 they finally opened a store there in Milan. Yes? I'm not sure what clarification you're hoping for; I don't see any dispute or conflict (but may well just be overlooking something). — JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 17:59, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I am going to make these edits to the page since it seems there is consensus here that they are reasonable. Ecity97 (talk) 15:02, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]