Talk:Topshop

Corrections needed

There is a citation error on this article that needs to be attended to. Being an inexperienced wiki editor, I dare not touch it myself. --146.85.237.185 (talk) 15:52, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Just a big advertisement

I must remember to log out as it wasn't me that contributed here.Ceedoubleu

This entry is mostly worthless, just an advertisment. "Topshop is an outlet for girls who enjoy changing their clothes on a regular basis..." ? Give me a break. That's like "America is a place for people who love freedom and hate bad people." --BlackberryLaw 20:06, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Today, I did what I could in an attempt to make the entry less like an advertisement. As an entry, it just sucks in general. BlackberryLaw 23:12, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I tidied this rticle up abit last night, added afew links to some other wiki's, The stuff written on TopshopUSA is of really poor quality, if it isnt tided up i may delete it. Sheep21 1:24am, 24 July 2006

I'm studyin topshop and need to know the meanings behind the company. what are the ideologies conveyed through the models, clothes etc. also the political economy (study of production, arts of selling and buying, the relationship between production and consumption)any help here? would be grateful.

I think you are looking in the wrong place for the above information to be honest. What you have requested as added info would be an interely different topic and would also be based a lot on individual opinion which is not what this sight is about. Its a n encyclopedia and not a text book.

I deleted " Young females cannot afford the ridiculous prices they are currently asking for their average-quality clothes." as it wasn't neutral Pippa.rose 13:50, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

DRCG

There is really a CHAIN of stores in the Congo? Does it deserve any more of a mention with it being at the top of the article instead of at the bottom with the other international locations?

Hi, Not an experienced user of this, please be aware that Topshop does not have stores in Austria

Fashionable?

In the 1980s TopShop was deeply unfashionable, its successful re-invention as a fashionable brand is an astonishing marketing success.

"Deeply unfashionable" according to whom? Fashion is subjective - without a source, the above statement is opinion, not fact.

It would be more neutral to define Topshop's progress in terms of commercial success, rather than "fashionability". 217.155.20.163 17:27, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

isn't 'deeply unfashionable', or rather 'deeply fashionable' oxymoronic? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.27.155.40 (talk) 17:59, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Australia?

There's a little Australian flag there. Is Top Shop in Australia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.218.79.211 (talk) 01:00, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Protests and criticisms

I removed this sentence as it seemed somewhat trivial (a single protest in a single store that only appeared to involve two people, with key news value being the fact that the officers were armed): 'In February 2011 armed police arrested 19 year old Jed Miller (after searching him in front of shocked library-goers) for writing "pay your taxes" in washable ink on the wall of a Top Shop branch in Colchester.' This has been reverted by SovalValtos. Fair enough, but it isn't a particularly well-constructed addition at present, so could we a) expand to provide a bit more context about the protest to relate it back to the subject of the article, which is Topshop and b) remove/tone down the 'in front of shocked library goers' – 'shocked' isn't actually in the newspaper report as far as I can see and sounds suspiciously like a point of view that merely sensationalises the story. Many thanks. Libby norman (talk) 10:41, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

I have edited the sentence to show the essence of the protest being about the payment, or non payment of tax by Topshop.SovalValtos (talk) 12:09, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, SovalValtos. I'm going to look at this whole section again when I've finished improving the brand history and sorting out some of the dead links (I'm up to the 1980s at present). I'd suggest it needs to start with some sort of very brief explanation of the political/ethical trading climate with a non partisan reference or two. As I recall, Topshop was a high-profile target but was far from alone. This reference gives some context on taxes [1]. The ethical trading (sweatshop) issue is more complex but I believe general criticisms of big retailers began around 2007. Other big brands such as Primark and Walmart have also been a focus here, so I'll look to see if I can find a general source that gives some background. Libby norman (talk) 13:02, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

I've now reviewed all references for this section and amended somewhat. The first reference didn't mention Uzbekistan and it talked about slave labour not slaves (there is a subtle difference). It didn't mention the agreement that Topshop supposedly refused to sign so that also came out. In the second, I clarified the nature of the protest and the number of protestors. In the third I mentioned that it was one man in Colchester and took out young – still not convinced this story is very significant, but it is now accurate thanks to Solvatos' amendment. Fine to add more detail back in or more protests/criticisms, but everything in this section should be supported factually and with newspaper references. The section now opens with the simple statement that Topshop was among the retailers targeted and a ref as that provides some context.Libby norman (talk) 16:31, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Improving this page

I'm starting to improve this page, notably the history section. Topshop is a key brand in the UK with a long history, and worked with Mary Quant, Stirling Cooper and the like in the early days, as well as helping to take high fashion concepts into mass market retail. It may take a few days to infill and upgrade the history section as I am sourcing not just from current Goggle-able stuff but newspaper archives. I've taken the flag off the history section as I do this as it's just a bit more clutter on the page. It can be put back on after I've finished if other editors think it still needs more work. Many thanks Libby norman (talk) 11:58, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

This page has now been pulled up a bit in terms of its referencing, factual accuracy and early background. What is still missing is a clear and succinct narrative about some of the more recent history – Philip Green bought Topshop in 2004 according to this [2], but we're still looking a bit light on bringing the company history up to that point. Input and info are appreciated. Libby norman (talk) 22:48, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

User:Libby norman fine work. Thank you. Some clarity about who owns what and has done the buying would be useful. Arcadia, a private equity group, Sir Philip Green and Tina are all mentioned, are the shareholder(s) in charge? SovalValtos (talk) 23:05, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment SovalValtos and for your input to improve. Well it's privately owned rather than a PLC, so that means no shareholders in the traditional sense. Burton (which was the name of the group) was a PLC for a reasonable period of time. I know something of the history but think I will be back on the newspaper archives to look up the period up to 2004 for source refs and contemporaneous descriptions to clarify this bit of the history. This, as an aside, adds some background colour [3] (worth reading pt2 as well). Adding a bit more about this period might also help with other Arcadia group pages – they all seem to need a bit of work. Quite a lot of the company pages on Wiki have similar quality problems – they either focus pretty much on the present or get hijacked by PRs, fans or foes. Libby norman (talk) 00:11, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Well you've done a shite job of it, this is need of a rewrite by someone with knowledge of what a reference needs to be, and no it is not just breaking an article into numbered paragraphs and calling it reference material! Each reference has to be source material backing up what you are writing. This is what drives people nuts about the horrifically uneven policing that goes on in the Wikipedia world, and why schools do not allow use of Wikipedia as source material! Had this Wikipedia page been about an iconic American brand you would have been inundated with descriptions of all of the rules you have broken, instead you have conversations in the Talk Page that also violates Wikipedia rules, and after all of these years, and numerous calls for corrections, it remains as a prime example of why Wikipedia is still a !! 2600:1700:8A90:ECF0:D91D:9042:1168:E0DB (talk) 06:32, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Entry into France

I happened to be in Paris a couple of times in the late 1990s and recall seeing a branch of Top Shop in the form of a stand-alone shop unit. It made a bit of an impression on me, simply for being a British brand in a foreign country. Obviously this "original research" would not qualify for inclusion in the actual article, but I wonder whether it would be worth investigating online or through any other suitable routes. A P Monblat (talk) 15:12, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Topshop. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140630131512/http://www.arcadiagroup.co.uk/about-us/our-history to http://www.arcadiagroup.co.uk/about-us/our-history
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080102143303/http://www.topshop.com/blog/2007/07/Jul_27.html to http://www.topshop.com/blog/2007/07/Jul_27.html

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

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) 09:35, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Modern slavery allegations

There have been modern slavery allegations against TopShop, it seems important to cover this in the article.

Thanks

John Cummings (talk) 11:25, 10 February 2018 (UTC)