Talk:La Perla (clothing)
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
New version
[edit]Dear Wikipedia users, I have been asked by a communications company (on behalf of La Perla) to upload an improved version of this page. This version is based on the existing one, but the following have been improved:
- all unsourced or promotional sentences have been removed
- structure and formatting have been improved (in compliance with the Manual of Style)
- all sources have been checked, and broken ones have been replaced with new ones
- outdated or factually wrong information has been corrected
- a few Creative Commons images have been added to the page
Because of the conflict of interest guideline we cannot directly edit the page, so we have uploaded the new version to this temporary subpage: User:Giulia H2/La Perla/New. Please consider replacing the current version with this new and better one. Giulia H2 (talk) 14:17, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
- Good, the current version is a mess. I like the pictures, but why remove these books?
- Valerie Steele (11 March 2003). Fashion, Italian Style. Yale University Press. p. 89. ISBN 978-0-300-10014-3. Retrieved 7 October 2012.
- N. Groom (30 June 1997). New Perfume Handbook. Springer. p. 145. ISBN 978-0-7514-0403-6. Retrieved 8 October 2012.
- Also, why remove perfume?
- 125.173.15.191 (talk) 08:15, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
- You are right, that was overlooked. I have added the first source back. The perfumes are less a focus to the company than they were before, that is why they were removed (with the second source). Giulia H2 (talk) 11:19, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
- This is an encyclopedia! If they exist or existed in the past they should be in the article 125.173.15.191 (talk) 13:13, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
- You are right, that was overlooked. I have added the first source back. The perfumes are less a focus to the company than they were before, that is why they were removed (with the second source). Giulia H2 (talk) 11:19, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
- OK, I will add them to the Products section, with source. Thank you. Giulia H2 (talk) 13:36, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
- Now it looks ok, I’ll update it for you. You think the company could thank me with some free lingerie? (no just kidding). And with that bad joke I go to bed, bye 125.173.15.191 (talk) 14:59, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
- OK, I will add them to the Products section, with source. Thank you. Giulia H2 (talk) 13:36, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you so much! But I don’t think that would be appropriate, sorry ;) Giulia H2 (talk) 15:44, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
I will leave the edit request tag for a few days in case someone else (hopefully a registered user or administrator) wants to review the new version and compare it to the old one. I think it is an improvement, but please make your own judgement. If you find anything that might still be wrong or poorly sourced, please fix it. Thank you :) Giulia H2 (talk) 15:44, 2 September 2016 (UTC)