Talk:Dior

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - FA22 - Sect 200 - Thu

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 September 2022 and 8 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Olivia0831 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Olivia0831 (talk) 00:16, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Who Owns Who?

This Dior article states "Dior holds 42.36% shares and 59.01% of voting rights within LVMH" and the LVMH page says "Dior holds 42.36% shares and 59.01% of voting rights within LVMH". I'm missing something; this seems like a cross-ownership issue that should be flagged. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.180.228.131 (talk) 01:58, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Undue weight to "Plagiarism and cultural appropriation controversies" section

Under the heading "Plagiarism and cultural appropriation controversies" it states "Dior had presented (a garment) as their original designs without giving any credit to the people of Bihor nor crediting the Romanian people as source of inspiration." This is nonsensical. The history of fashion is full of examples of designers drawing inspiration from the national dress of countries other than their own. Indeed, one would be hard-pressed to name any fashion designer who had not done this, from the Spanish designer Mariano Fortuny's Greek chiton-influenced "Delphos gown" of the 1900s, to the French designer Yves Saint Laurent's "peasant blouses" of the 1980s, which were directly influenced by traditional Romanian shirts, to Japanese designer Nigo's current fashion designs, directly derivative of black American hip-hop fashions. Is Nigo guilty of "cultural appropriation"? If not, why not?
The passage continues: "As a result, Romanian people were outraged" (what, all 19 million of them?!) "and to fight against this cultural appropriation, a campaign was launched by Romanian fashion magazine Beau Monde..." Apparently the irony is lost on the editor who included this, that a Romanian fashion magazine is trading under a French name. How culturally-appropriative!
I would challenge anyone defending the length of this section, and its accusatory/condemnatory tone, to explain how it is "cultural appropriation" when Dior is influenced by say, Chinese traditional costume, but it is not "cultural appropriation" when a Chinese fashion designer such as Ma Ke chooses an English name for her company ("EXCEPTION de Mixmind"), or her fellow Chinese designer Masha Ma regularly "appropriates" traditional American styles such as sack suits and biker jackets. It seems to me that the only way that such accusations of "cultural appropriation" survive a cursory examination is if one is applying a double-standard. Objectively, the length of the section on "Plagiarism and cultural appropriation controversies" is far longer than its contents warrant, and its subjective cant is clear from the heading, which should be changed to the more neutral "Accusations of cultural appropriation and plagiarism".
Bricology (talk) 21:15, 16 October 2024 (UTC)