Talk:Triumph International/Archives/2014

Draft

I am affiliated with Triumph International and therefore have a substantial conflict of interest. I would like to help bring this article up to "Good Article" status eventually, while following best practices regarding COI.

I've prepared a draft at User:CorporateM/Triumph and would like to kindly request a disinterested editor consider my work. In compliance with WP:COI, if an editor finds the article to be a clear improvement, I will file a Request Edit asking that someone else go ahead and merge it into article-space. CorporateM (Talk) 14:54, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

While I'm not entranced by the organization of the article, and too much of it seems to be a litany of companies acquired and brands sold, it's still a major improvement over the existing start-class article. So I support replacing the existing article with the version at User:CorporateM/Triumph. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 03:48, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks @user:John Broughton! I'll go ahead and submit a Request Edit (above) asking someone to merge User:CorporateM/Triumph into article-space. Meanwhile, if you do have specific suggestions on how to re-organize it, I'd be open to any feedback. Though a GA review may also result in some more comments. CorporateM (Talk) 18:49, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

• I reviewed the article with a mind towards moving the draft to main space. CorporateM, I have left some tags and hidden comments which I think need to be dealt with before we can move forward with this. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:19, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Crisco 1492! I'll be responding to each comment and/or checking them off as I go here:

• Yup, "sloggi" appears to be all lower-case
• Reason for strike:  Done working conditions and pay
• Couldn't find any sources on why the Inspiration awards were discontinued
• It appears to be one in six woman in the world (presumably), but the source is not clear. I can provide a PDF of the full-text I obtained from the library's archives if you like.
• It doesn't appear as though it being a family company was ever included, in the Lead or elsewhere. Am I missing something?

CorporateM (Talk) 03:08, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

• Last question: it appears I'm remembering the current article and not the draft. Sorry! Yeah, I'd like a look at the PDF. Dropbox? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:36, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Crisco 1492 Here is the Apparel International article (bottom-left corner). It's easier to read if you zoom-in. CorporateM (Talk) 03:46, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

• Alright, it's not very clear where this 1 in 6 number comes from (world sales? what?). Mind you, that source also supports family ownership, which is useful. Also, that source capitalizes "Sloggi" for some reason. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:00, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

@Crisco 1492 I put "family owned" in the Lead with the source currently used in the article, but couldn't find a good place for it in the body, being that I don't have sources for an Organization section. I also added a few more bits of content where I found things as I was looking around. I noticed that their logo and website seem to emphasize lower-case for "sloggi", as well as some press releases though some put sloggi in title-caps in the title. CorporateM (Talk) 13:42, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Ok, a more recent press release does go by "Sloggi" argh. I could just ask them what their style guidelines are? Or is there a rule about how to handle it. CorporateM (Talk) 13:45, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

• Based on the treatment of the "i" products (iPhone, iPad etc.) I think the standard is to use the company's brand name. So just verify which the company prefers: Sloggi or sloggi. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:57, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

@Crisco 1492 Confirmed. It is "sloggi" (lowercase). CorporateM (Talk) 20:55, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

• Okay, it's gone live. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 18:09, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

  Please disable the "edit request" when you're ready: An editor asked for help with a long list on the pump and will be happy if it worked here. –Be..anyone (talk) 23:41, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

I went ahead and disabled it. Glad to see user:Sphilbrick is still rallying the troops to man the Request Edit queue, a much-needed endeavor. CorporateM (Talk) 00:01, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Needs images

The Good Article criteria requires that the article have images before it can qualify. I have to look-up the details, but I believe there is a Wikipedia conference in New York in a month or two and that is where Triumph made its entrance into the US market, so I should be able to get some photographs of local stores and products while I'm there. It may therefore be a while until it's ready for a GA nomination (after I get some photos). If anyone has a specific request of what I take a picture of, please let me know! CorporateM (Talk) 00:10, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

• You don't require images, they are just nice too have. Wouldn't a photograph of a Triumph-brand bra also work? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:12, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Yah, I was thinking one photo of a Triumph bra and one of the store entrance. The bra for the Products section and the store photo for the infobox or in the History section where it discusses US expansion. The German version of this article has some photos of the founders and old logos that could also be used. I usually see photos of execs as a promotional COI issue, but I am a bit more split on the historical versions of the trademark. I'll go ahead and nominate since it's not a stern requirement. I was also thinking whether there is a specific bra I can take a photo of that is distinctively "Triumph". Thoughts on the images from the German article? CorporateM (Talk) 00:54, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

• I don't think any of them are particularly good. For a store entrance, I think a German or UK branch would be better, under freedom of panorama laws. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:58, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Triumph International/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Bobamnertiopsis (talk · contribs) 23:02, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

I'll take this one. BobAmnertiopsis∴_ChatMe! 23:02, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

First readthrough

1a

• "It began with a staff of six people under the name Wirtschaftlicher Verein Spiesshofer & Braun, Familienverein reg."[6]" Where did that quotation mark come from?

 Done Strange, not sure where that came from. CorporateM (Talk) 02:54, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

• "The company took on its current namesake "Triumph," which is named after the Arc de Triomphe in Paris, in 1902." Try "In 1902, the company took on its current name, Triumph, with the Arc de Triomphe in Paris as its namesake."

 Done CorporateM (Talk) 02:55, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

• "The first Triumph International location outside of Germany was established in 1933" but later "The company's name was changed to "Triumph International" in 1959." If the latter is true, then the first instance might read better as "The first Triumph location outside of Germany was established in 1933" as the International part of the name had not yet been tacked on.

 Done CorporateM (Talk) 02:56, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

• "In the late 1970s the company introduced the sloggi brand" For consistency, put a comma after 1970s.

 Done CorporateM (Talk) 02:58, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

• "In the late 1970s the company introduced the sloggi brand, which sold undergarments made primarily of cotton and started using lighter fabrics such as nylon and lycra in the Triumph brand." Try switching around the halves of this sentence so you don't begin with a clause with a comma, then continue to another without one, like such: "In the late 1970s, the company started using lighter fabrics such as nylon and lycra in the Triumph brand and introduced the sloggi brand, which sold undergarments made primarily of cotton."

 Done CorporateM (Talk) 02:58, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

• "In late 2001 Burma Campaign UK campaigned" Comma after 2001 for consistency.

 Done CorporateM (Talk) 03:01, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

• "employee's actions negatively effected the brand's image" effected→affected

 Done CorporateM (Talk) 03:02, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

• "In 2003 advertisements for bikinis" Comma after 2003 for consistency.

 Done CorporateM (Talk) 03:02, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

• " It also acquired a lingerie manufacturer and retailer in Mexico, Vicky Form." Awkward phrasing. Try: "It also acquired Vicky Form, a lingerie manufacturer and retailer in Mexico."

 Done CorporateM (Talk) 03:03, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

• "Sloggi: Men's and women's underwear" Is Sloggi capitalized or not? In most of the article, it isn't. Should it be?

 Done It's lowecase CorporateM (Talk) 03:05, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

• "one in six women in the world own a bra" I would put this in the past tense (own→owned) as it was a quarter of a century ago.

 Done CorporateM (Talk) 03:05, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

• "45 percent of women in Germany own a Triumph product" Same as above.

 Done CorporateM (Talk) 03:08, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

• "sports apparel, nightwear and others." Others would best be specified: Other garments? Other undergarments?

 Done I just used "other products" CorporateM (Talk) 03:10, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

• "As of 2007, 50 percent of Triumph sales are in Asia." Are→were

 Done CorporateM (Talk) 03:10, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

• You might consider linking "Heubach" in the lead. (It's not in violation of WP:OVERLINK to repeat a link in the lead and the body.)

 Done CorporateM (Talk) 03:12, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

1b

• The prose of the lead looks adequate and summarizes the article pretty well, but the infobox includes some claims that are either not elsewhere in the article, contradictory to claims that are sourced in the article, or simply unreferenced:
  • "Number of locations 2,100 stores" should agree with the last sentence of the article, "As of 2013, the company operates 2,000 Triumph stores and its products are sold in 40,000 department stores."

Would you prefer we standardize on the secondary source from 2013 (citation 45) that says 2,000 locations, or a weaker, primary, but more updated primary source[1] that says 2,100? CorporateM (Talk) 03:21, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

I think the primary source is fine in this occasion, especially because it is more likely to be updated with greater frequency. BobAmnertiopsis∴_ChatMe! 00:56, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

 Done CorporateM (Talk) 01:49, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

• • "Revenue $986.3 million (2013)" should be cited and included in the body of the article.

 Not done I actually took this out. It looks like the revenue data was actually from "Triumph Group" an aerospace manufacturer, and Triumph International hasn't published updated numbers since 2011. CorporateM (Talk) 03:30, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

• • "Employees 36,500" should also be cited and included in the body in addition to the infobox.

 Done I added a source, but didn't add it to the body. I typically prefer to avoid repetition between the infobox and the body. CorporateM (Talk) 03:39, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Fine by me! BobAmnertiopsis∴_ChatMe! 00:56, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

2a

• There are a lot of German sources. It would be helpful to include the language parameter in the cite template, as you have done in ref #13. "(in German)".

 Done CorporateM (Talk) 02:03, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

• Refs 29 and 30 use a different date format than the rest of the refs do. Please standardize.

 Done CorporateM (Talk) 14:21, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

• There are several sources (all in German, I think) that pull from TextilWirtschaft or Der Spiegel archives. Two things: none of them need the "textilwirtschaft.de" or "spiegel.de" in their titles. Also, they should all really have accessdates. BobAmnertiopsis∴_ChatMe! 03:11, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

 Done CorporateM (Talk) 14:50, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Don't forget refs 14-16! BobAmnertiopsis∴_ChatMe! 16:28, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

 Done CorporateM (Talk) 17:11, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

• One last thing: Check sources that you physically retrieved that list a page number (54-58, for example, though they're not the only ones). In the cite templates, make sure to list "page" if only one page is referenced or "pages" if it's multiple. "pages=33-35" results in "pp. 33-35", whereas "page=33" results in the single p "p. 33". As it stands now, several sources list "pages=33" resulting in the incorrect "pp. 33". (p is for one page, pp is for multiple). Once you clean that up, I believe this article will be good to pass!

 Done CorporateM (Talk) 20:58, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

2b–3b

• No qualms here!

4

• From what I've seen of your editing, you've been the gold standard of COI disclosure and ethical corporate editing. This article fairly covers all aspects of the topic, giving due weight, including to the labor disputes in this company's history. Thanks for your work on this and in the broader sense of bringing integrity to COI editing.

Thanks! CorporateM (Talk) 20:58, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

5

• Looks good!

6

• Triumph logo image is hosted on en and has a complete FUR. The other two images are hosted on Commons under acceptable licenses. FoP is not a problem, both because the images were taken in the UK and because they were provided by the company. No problems here!

Final readthrough

• Thanks for addressing my comments quickly and thoroughly. This article now satisfies GA criteria and I'm happy to pass it. Thanks for your work on it. BobAmnertiopsis∴_ChatMe! 22:00, 7 October 2014 (UTC)