Jump to content

Talk:Uniqlo

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 October 2021 and 9 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sunnydayreading.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 11:58, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Labour Record

Does anyone know anything about Uniqlo's labour record? (Use of sweatshop labour etc). 86.25.198.166 (talk) 23:42, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, but I second the call for a section on labour. A section devoted to criticisms, if there are any, should also be acknowledged.--Drdak (talk) 09:12, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done. zazpot (talk) 00:54, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Employees

Is the employees figure accurate? It seems unusually low. Rmannion 09:30, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Uniqlo new (English).png

Image:Uniqlo new (English).png 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 11:46, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Urban Store

What does the parapraph about the history from 1998-2002 mean when it says "they opened their first urban UNIQLO store in Tokyo"? Fukuro-machi is right in the middle of downtown Hiroshima, which while not a city on the same scale of Tokyo is certainly not rural.

Lowercase title

Please note that on the English Wikipedia (as opposed to the Japanese one), products are not written in ALL-CAPS but following regular English usage. This trademark being a contraction of "unique clothing" (and spelled "Uniqlo" at reputable sources such as Time.com[1] or NYTimes.com[2]), it is written Uniqlo in the article per the guide at WP:MOSTM: "choose the style that most closely resembles standard English, regardless of the preference of the trademark owner" (Time not TIME). 62.147.24.53 (talk) 07:10, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Too much pointless data

The section on Uniqlock for example should be one or two sentences long at most. Who cares who many people downloaded it? If it has any importance it should say why, or not mention it at all. If there is on objection I'm gonna trim it down. Niczar ⏎ 14:46, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources and accuracy

There seem to be a lot of "citation needed"-s.

A *LOT* more reliable than just the UNIQLO website is the Fast Retailing website, Fast Retailing being the parent company of UNIQLO.

If nobody has any objections, I would like to edit some the information to match it with that of the Fast Retailing website and also add more information about the relationship between the two.

Also, I noticed that the UNIQLO website claims its establishment date as September 2, 1974 but the Fast Retailing history doesn't say when UNIQLO was established, only that the first casual clothing UNIQLO store was opened in June 1984. So what happened in that decade...?

Himizuki (talk) 17:17, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The websites of companies are not considered to be reliable sources. Other sources (newspaper and magazine articles, for example) are much better. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 18:53, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have just had some further discussion about this here. I am inclined to side with John Broughton, because IMO a subject has an obvious conflict of interest when publishing material about themselves (on their own website or anywhere else). However, not everyone agrees. Please WP:PING me if you reply. Thanks! zazpot (talk) 03:46, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Please allow me to remind you, zazpot, that WP:SELFPUB is part of one of our three core content policies, Verifiability. Using a company website to verify the current number of stores is perfectly acceptable, and is completely justified by policy. It is up to you to make the case that using the website violates that policy. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:02, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Cullen328 yes, I am aware of that. But WP:SELFPUB features caveats, including these two: "Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, usually in articles about themselves or their activities ... so long as ... the material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim [and] the article is not based primarily on such sources." Before I started editing this article, several of its references did cite the Uniqlo or Fast websites in self-serving ways, and the article was primarily based on those sources. I hope this explains why I am so wary of leaning at all heavily on WP:SELFPUB here. Please WP:PING me if you reply. Thanks! zazpot (talk) 04:22, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That was then and this is now, zazpot. There is nothing self serving and it is not an exceptional claim to provide the number of retail outlets that a company operates on its own website, unless reliable sources report that the company has a reputation of lying about the number of stores it has. And if this article was once primarily sourced to company websites, then that is no longer the case. You must rely on WP:SELFPUB, because it is part of a core content policy. Individual opinions cannot override policy. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:58, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Cullen328. I take your point about policy. I hope you take mine about needing to avoid self-serving uses or excessive reliance upon self-published sources :-) Maybe the Fast Retail website is telling the truth about how many Uniqlo stores exist, but there is a risk that it is no more trustworthy on that front than Facebook's claim about how many users it has. This is all in accordance with WP:SELFPUB. And while WP:SELFPUB means we editors can use such sources, it does not mean that we must use them.
On reflection, I think the right balance, w.r.t. Uniqlo, is this: use the Uniqlo or Fast Retailing websites strictly in accordance with WP:SELFPUB per policy, which dictates keeping low the proportion of the article sourced from those sites. If evidence emerges that the company is exaggerating its statistics, then stop using it as a source for any such claim and remove corresponding text from the article.
Does this sound about right to you? Please WP:PING me if you reply. Thanks! zazpot (talk) 10:21, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Since you are describing what the policy says, I agree, zazpot. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:51, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that my statement in 2010 wasn't fully accurate - the five exceptions were, even back then, in the guideline on reliable sources. And looking at the article, the sentences where "citation needed" appears aren't particularly self-serving. However, sourcing all of those sentences from the company (or its parent's) website does seem to be edging into a violation of "the article is not based primarily on such sources".

I'd like to make one more point - regardless of the issue of reliability, or whether Wikipedia guidelines or policies allow self-citing, Wikipedia is intended to be a starting point - that's what encyclopedia articles are for. But if the vast majority of citations in an article are to a company's own website, the reader gets relatively little from going and reading those citations. They won't ever say anything negative about a situation, even though it's truly mixed. (For example, an expansion into a new country might run into difficulties, though ultimately successful.) By contrast, newspaper articles and magazines provide context, and typically go much more in-depth about a particular situation or action or event. We do the readers a disservice if there are few such citations, particularly when an article appears to be of significant complexity because it repeatedly cites different company web pages and press releases. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 02:44, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Still needs work

I just completed several edits to address problems with clarity, lack of references, and non-notable details such as precise opening dates (which also lacked references). The article still needs a lot of work. 72.244.206.95 (talk) 02:12, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Store Count Chart

Is there any reason for why the store count chart is in the order it is? Also I'm looking at deleting the second reference in the US section citing the closure of Uniqlo's New Jersey stores from it's first expansion into the US market, since the company has since moved back into that market. Travisn917 (talk) 22:10, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Now sorted in alphabetical order (except Japan listed first). Tomh009 (talk) 22:59, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese name in Japan

Please add the simplified four-character Japanese?-version logo to the article, and explain it. Please translate/explain/discuss the Japanese name of the company. Please explain and discuss the usage of UNIQLO in Japan. Is this "English" branding significant or dominant in Japan? Is some version of this common in spoken or written references to the company within Japan? The US website features both versions of the logo, but the Japanese website features only UNI-QLO, more than the 4-char version! -96.233.22.219 (talk) 14:07, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Uniqlo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:09, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Uniqlo Australia

I found the wording in the Australia section to be a little confusing. Perhaps content was added without carefully reviewing what was already in place. Particularly regarding two mentions of "A third store"

Looking at the extract below : "A third store opened at Eastland Shopping Centre on 29 October 2015." implies to me the third store in Australia.

"In Sydney a third store opened on 16 October 2014 at Macquarie Centre" implies that the Macquarie Centre was the third in Sydney, but this was before the Eastland Shopping Centre (Melbourne) Third Store in Australia in 2015?

It's a little unclear as to whether the ordering of store openings relates to being in Melbourne or Sydney, or the order of opening in Australia in general.

From the page as is now:

Australia Their first store opened on 16 April 2014 at Emporium Melbourne, Melbourne CBD and their second store opened on 17 September 2014 at Chadstone Shopping Centre, Chadstone. A third store opened at Eastland Shopping Centre on 29 October 2015. In Sydney a third store opened on 16 October 2014 at Macquarie Centre, North Ryde and their fourth store opened on 13 November 2014 at Mid City Centre. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ScottDK (talk • contribs) 13:07, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The whole article is a badly written, uncited mess. I suspect much of it has been written by Japanese PR people or Uniqlo staffers with limited English. --Ef80 (talk) 16:50, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Uniqlo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:01, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Missing information and unreliable source

Hello everyone! I am new to the wikipedia community and learning how to engage with the talk page. I am a student simply critiquing this article for an assignment.

As I analyzed this article, I noticed two mistakes that could be improved or revised.

Firstly, information is outdated and missing. Under the section of worldwide stores, Canada is not included though Uniqlo opened its first store in Toronto on Friday September 30th 2016. Another Uniqlo branch will be opening at Yorkdale mall which is also in the city of Toronto. This information is not included and ought to be added to keep the article updated. Secondly, there was a source that was not cited properly. Under Other Collaborations, source 62 did not include the author or the publisher nor the date it was written therefore, it was cited incorrectly.

--COMN4201Kim (talk) 17:32, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Add later scandal cases

Recently, Reuters have reported that Monday 25th of September 500 policemen used water canons and electric rods to disperse around 200 protesting villagers(in Hanoi, Vietnam). This was due to the harmful environmental practices of their textile/clothing provider "Pacific Textiles". UNIQLO has been affected since the workers were striking for several months. Protesters/vilagers demand an ethical environmental standard to be implemented, but has yet to come. Duda2400 (talk) 10:01, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Duda2400, thanks for the tip. Potential sources: [3] [4] [5] [6]
Might be better to create a Pacific Textiles article and put the information there, though? Other sources potentially able to establish notability for the latter could perhaps include [7] and [8]. zazpot (talk) 00:06, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Uniqlo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:17, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Countries in the 'International operations' section should be in alphabetical order

In my opinion, the countries in the 'International operations' section of this article should be in alphabetical order to make the article more professional. Xboxsponge15 (talk) 18:40, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Russian history

There's no section on the history of the brand in Russia 2A02:C7F:861D:6A00:A034:B46F:A8EC:C331 (talk) 17:20, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese factory strikes are wildcat strikes, not sanctioned by govt

Whoever made the claims that the strikes are supported by the CCP is wildly misinformed and downplayed the agency of the protesters. Several labor activism sources noted that the the strikes are organised via grassroots activists and bypassed official unions, while local police actually took the side of the management and arrested the protesters. 120.17.144.97 (talk) 02:38, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Uniqlo&oldid=1225224974"