Talk:Nike sweatshops

Untitled

The overall tone of this page is biased and personal. I suggest that somebody fix this because I'm lazy. :#)

I agree. This is not a neutral article. People should not purchase trainers for 200 € when the worker who made it earned cents. There has to be a social responsibility here. It is important that the article shows how much Nike is devoted to profit alone and to the exploitation of 3rd world countries and children labor.

Wikipedia is not a platform for opinion. Moral responsibility, though important, does not have a place on this website. jfoldmei (talk) 19:38, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

I agree, I will work to amend the bias on this page, making it more representative of the workers' perspective rather than Nike, the powerhouse Bakeaholic (talk) 08:51, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Neutrality

This article is so unbelievably POV that it makes the I-P conflict articles look neutral. I am trying to figure out how to rectify this, but there is also a pending merger discussion, which, if successful, should involve a bias cleanup.--Metallurgist (talk) 14:54, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

 Done Enough at least. --Metallurgist (talk) 06:23, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Sweatshops and cheap labor.

I've come to find this page very biased and uninformative. I feel that it doesn't really say anything about the harm it brings to other countries, and the face that Nike is using these poor people for their labor, and not even paying them enough for it. My suggestion is to add these parts to this page, so people can get a better feel of how Nike actually runs its business, and exploits people all over the world. Kelsalot911 (talk) 19:29, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Nike vs Nike Inc.

I reverted an IP edit claiming the two are unrelated. Seems dubious; article uses the business names interchangeably. Please provide verifiability if the IP edit was actually correct. --Ds13 (talk) 01:37, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Mises Institute?

IMO, we need to be very careful about quoting them. They are fringe economists who are good at selling the scare, but have a strong track record of predicting disasters that don't happen. They have been predicting an inflationary death spiral while inflation has stayed low for 30 years and interest rates have fallen by more than half. It is not clear whether they have ever made an accurate prediction. They are often quoted by "The world is going to end tomorrow, so please buy my financial newsletter!" style services, though.70.113.72.73 (talk) 21:29, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

If a source is widely regarded as fringe, and that fact is verifiable via reliable sources then I agree... their contribution here should be qualified and/or removed. What can you offer? --Ds13 (talk) 21:40, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Reliability of the source aside, the quoted article offers no citation for its claim that Jonah Peretti's article "led to an uptick in the sale of (Nike) personalized shoes".67.169.117.12 (talk) 02:48, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it does, in the last paragraph: "His benighted toil has led to an uptick in the sale of its personalized shoes." The article does not say where the information is coming from, though. Pbeinbo (talk) 13:46, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

If nothing else, they should be described specifically as advocates of the Austrian School, not merely "libertarian." 108.34.186.243 (talk) 04:55, 17 September 2018 (UTC)