Talk:Louis Vuitton

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Reason for recent deletions on article?

I recently expanded this article to cover information on the "Modern Age of Louis Vuitton" (which covered Vuitton's merge with Moet et Chandon and Hennesy to create the LVMH conglomerate) and the "Millenium Age of Louis Vuitton" (which covers the company hiring Marc Jacobs to create the company's first Prêt-à-Porter line, as well as recent design developments, including collaborations between Jacobs and Takashi Murakami). These sections were deleted, and I am wondering why.

Also, there is currently a link to someone's personal "fan site" for the company. I placed a link to eLUXURY, which is an official site for the company, and it was removed, despite the fact that the "ILoveMyLouis.com - Unofficial Louis Vuitton Fan Site" remained as a link. What is going on?

Vincentanton

Yes, but this article is not about eLUXURY. I posted a message explaining to the talk page of yout IP address. I'll repost it to your talk page now that you're logged in. --GraemeL (talk) 22:58, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks... but that doesn't quite answer my question as why the information I added about the modern developments of the company was deleted. Vincentanton 23:04, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
I probably didn't see that you had multiple edits when I hit the revert button on the external links and managed to remove some of your other contributions in the process. I'll go back and take care of that. My mistake. --GraemeL (talk) 23:08, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
That was indeed the case. I've restored your other contributions. I think I got it right, but you should probably go and check that I didn't make another error. --GraemeL (talk) 23:10, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks! I really appreciate your help. Thanks for the clarification. Vincentanton 23:16, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mr. Vuitton's Success

Who said he never succeeded until after his death? The official site says otherwise (as do other biographies). I'm going to change this, so if anyone disagrees please message me or comment here or whatever.

[edit] Advertisement?

Reads like an ad? Pcb21| Pete 13:55, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Not really. I have, absolutely no ties with LVMH, and I was trying to highlight their involvement that people rarely know about the company. Realize this was my first article, and there may be a bit of POV. Sean 20:15, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Counterfeitting

I'd really like to see a section on counterfitting Louis Vuitton.

It's one of the most copied products in the world, and it's reached a level where the counterfeits are even exclusive - people are 'proud' to have a counterfeit, just because it's similar to the real thing.

Good idea? Kirkbroadhurst 1642 70205 AEST.


We need a citation on the claim that the LV logo was originally designed to combat counterfeiting. AidanBC 06:04, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

This information is covered in an article in the International Herald Tribune, viewable in the link below:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/06/25/business/google.php

Hope that helps. Vincentanton 23:03, 25 June 2006 (UTC)


I added a portion regarding the successful lawsuit with Britney Spears as part of their fight against counterfeiting. --Pmedema (talk) 18:15, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] War time allegations

I deleted an article from the Guardian that was inserted unedited into the text. The article was not so much about Louis Vuitton as about the book and its (lack of) reception in France, making the usual "where there's smoke there's fire" arguments. Just not encyclopedic (only for an entry on the book). DocendoDiscimus 10:48, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Vuitton was the first trunk-maker to create a flat-topped trunk or an airtight trunk.

"Vuitton was the first trunk-maker to create a flat-topped trunk or an airtight trunk." Flat top that is also water proof? --24.94.190.164 16:23, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pronunciation

How is Louis's surname pronounced? I say the first syllable should be pronounced like "vweet", but it seems everyone else says "voot". Can we have an expert opinion, please? 213.94.247.66 17:42, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

"vweet" is correct, "voot" is the bastardized American translation.

I've heard it more pronounced like "veet," at least by every employee that's ever answered the phone at any of their stores in the US that I've called. And in Singapore as well. Vincentanton 00:13, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Monogram Canvas

The article speaks of the Monogram Canvas. What's meant with that: the VL logo alone () or the flower symbol pattern printed on the leather? --Abdull 10:00, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

The Monogram Canvas is the brown canvas printed with the LV logo, the flowers, and the quatrefoils. Vuitton does not manufacture a canvas with only the LV monogram, nor does it manufacture a canvas with only the flowers and quatrefoils. The original Monogram Canvas (a brown background with gold symbols on it) is by far the company's most popular and profitable line. Other lines by the company use the same pattern (the LV plus the flowers plus the quarefoils) in different materials and different colors, but the design does not vary (except on very, very limited edition items that are not available for sale to the general public). --Vincentanton

What exactly is the monogram canvas made of? I know it is not leather, is it vinyl?

It is canvas made of Egyptian cotton which is covered in resin to make it water resistant and durable, and then the monogram pattern is silkscreened on. Tom (talk) 20:11, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Enjo kosai addition

My addition on enjo kosai/enjo kousai in Japan (it is transliterated both ways) will be controversial. However, just Google "Louis Vuitton" and "enjo kosai" together and you will see how many people have made the connection. Teenage girls in Japan are regularly "turning tricks" in order to obtain LV handbags! Oddly, in France the bags are less common than in Japan, especially with young irls.

I hope other Wikipedians will support includion of this topic and will help develop a wording whihc is acceptable to most.

This does not belong in the LV article. It is not LV specific and as far as we know is completely a creation of the tabloids. (which in japan tend to sensationalize sex rather than UFOS). Even if true this "phenomenon" is really not related to LV in any way, LV just happens to be popular in japan. And momentary popularity among women in japan is hardly worth a whole section in the article. Smells like a hoax, but I am RVing based on its irrelevence to the LV article, and unecyclopedic nature. --Darkfred Talk to me 19:26, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Darkfred. That has no place on this article--it is irrelevent and belongs in a tabloid rather than an encyclopedia. --Vincentanton 16:58, 2 September 2006 (UTC)RRSanzio

[edit] Cleanup / Edit

I've done a little cleanup of the article, mostly by deleting some of the article's bloat. There were a lot of unnecessary details included (especially in some lists) which really didn't belong in an encyclopedia article.

For example, the list of celebrity adherents to the brand was way too long, so I've cut that down a bit. Some of the details in the company's history was also definitely extraneous, such as the note about other companies which also used the Malletier name, which in no way relates to Vuitton.

Vincentanton 20:42, 25 November 2006 (UTC)RRSanzio

[edit] Vandalism

Looks like someone is having a bit of fun with the last section. and I like Cheese?


I agree that there does appear to be increasing vandalism in the article. For example, the information about Vuitton's birth, early life, and apprenticeship have been deleted multiple times. For what reason? I'm not sure. Additionally, someone keeps adding a paragraph about the fact that some French philosophers mentioned trunks and their manufacture one hundred years prior to Vuitton founding his company... and that does not relate to the article at all! And so if an American philosopher mentions water I suppose any article about water must include this mention? I think not! Vincentanton 03:27, 2 December 2006 (UTC)


Simple enough. I've protected the page. Supergeo 01:01, 23 February 2007 (UTC)RRSanzio

[edit] Discount for Louis Vuitton

Discounted Louis Vuitton does exist. LVMH does sell their products at a discounted rate to employees and out-of-season products are also sold at an extreme discount to employees. This is not a well known fact and LVMH certainly does not want their 'no-sale' policy tarnished. There has been sightings of Louis Vuitton products at Costco as well. The website http://mypoupette.com/seconds.php is not a valid source - it is a website of a cartel of sellers of second-hand Vuitton products and certainly extremely bias. I will remove the line. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.195.224.254 (talk) 22:58, 7 February 2007 (UTC). RRSanzio

[edit] Mess

This article is a total mess. The layout needs to be cleaned up. It is just a list of disjointed dates of marginal notability. The only section that shouldn't be tossed is the counterfeiting area. I will revert any further additions to the list of dates. I intend to rewrite this article as an encyclopedic article in the next few days. Orangemarlin 19:31, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Only 1% not counterfeit?

I can't find anything in the source linked to confirm the following:

Ironically, Louis Vuitton has become the most counterfeited brand in fashion history, with just over 1% of all items branded with the Vuitton logo not counterfeit.[1]

The [1] refers to the following article about LV taking Google to court; fascinating, but not relevant: http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/06/25/business/google.php?page=1

It's annoying, because I really, really, wanted it to be true. Kayman1uk 15:06, 6 October 2007 (UTC)