Talk:Brooks Brothers/Archive 1

Archive 1

Notable Customers

All the items mentioned, as of today at least (except the Will Smith referece), are from the Generations of Style, the history book about Brooks Brothers. I remember reading these exact same examples with the Lincoln coat being a notable example. --Jhlynes 06:17, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:BrooksBrothers.gif

Image:BrooksBrothers.gif 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

"Today" section

In the "Today" section, it says, "In 2010 Brooks Brothers will be closing its current and long running location in Edison, NJ, which is the call center and online customer service location and will re-open in Enfield, CT." In my opinion these abbreviations are somewhat Byzantine / unclear. Where is CT? I know that it's Enfield, Connecticut, but this is an encyclopaedia with an international commitment: just saying "CT" perhaps suggests an assumption that the reader will know what this means. As an English reader (And England is the ultimate origin of the Enfield name) this gives off a feeling of American bias here. Clearer, please! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.173.164.62 (talk) 01:49, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Wp:npov

This is a terrible example of an article and one of the most biased that I have seen in my time on Wikipedia...needs a total renovation Timhud 00:29, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree, I believe the Working for Brooks Brothers, Company Ethics, and Getting Hired section be the first to go. It is very biased and completly uncited. Lenore Schwartz 14:46, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. I think the article needs what amounts to a complete overhaul, barring perhaps the section on history and notable clitnele. Everything after that is biased, riddled with errors, and sadly unprofessional. Someone with knowledge on the topic should rework this article as soon as possible, and the problematic sections of the article should be removed in the mean time. EFisher724

Agreed, this article is like a promotional item for Brooks Brothers clothing. There is no mention of the hiring practices or working conditions of employees.

I hope that Claudio does NOT do for Brooks Brothers what he did for Casual Corner. Namely run it in the ground and sell it to piece millers for a dime on the dollar. I fear the Thom Brown collection is the beginning of the end for Brooks Brothers. What an ulgy collection of left field clothing. It seems no one in the organization will remind him of where Brooks came from and where it needs to stay. RGS —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.66.236.208 (talk) 01:45, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

BetacommandBot (talk) 03:57, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Abraham Lincoln

The article conflicts with itself on the Abraham Lincoln/black suit story. One section says Brooks Brothers didn't sell black suits because of Lincoln's assassination, another says that was just a myth. So which is it? I'd edit the article, but I don't know the answer. 1995hoo (talk) 18:12, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Problem

This article does have problems with POV, but i would not say it goes as far as becoming an advertisement. I think that most of the information is verifiable, even if it is all lauditory. I suggest we change the tag to one less severe, such as "This article needs citations" or cleanup Mrathel (talk) 05:00, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism

"A popular book on evolution suggested that a Neanderthal man might pass unnoticed if he went out wearing the suit.[3]" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.241.202.243 (talk) 19:29, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Flemish wool merchants too?

This article had two nearly identical sentences. I have just removed one, quoted verbatim here: "It consists of a sheep suspended in a ribbon, which was the symbol of Flemish wool merchants in the fifteenth century and later, traditionally had been a symbol of British wool merchants." This means that "Flemish" no longer appears in the article. This post is a note to myself or others to find a source for Flemish merchants and/or British merchants, and to put "Flemish" back in, if we find a suitable cite. --Officiallyover (talk) 23:39, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Puppy-dog sentence

Under the leadership of Wood, Brooks Brothers became even more traditional.

Sound like a freshman essay, or advertising copy. What's it mean? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.170.236.50 (talk) 16:04, 7 February 2016 (UTC)