Talk:AussieBum/Archive 1

Archive 1

whats a cossie?

I'm an aussie, and i dont have any idea what a cossie is, and there doesnt seem to be a wiki article on the "cossie" either. perhaps we could get someone to write a short description or post a photo explaining the term? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.4.74.65 (talk) 15:48, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

• Refer to swimsuit; it's in the opening paragraph.
  

  A swimsuit (also swimmers), bathing suit (also bathers), aqua jammies or swimming costume (sometimes shortened to cozzie) is an item of clothing designed to be worn for swimming. In New Zealand English and some areas of Australian English, swimsuits are usually called togs.

  
  I didn't link it as this article already has links to swimsuit, though feel free to link it if it makes the article clearer. Also, please leave text as Aussie cossie as it's a quote from the newspaper. Bren 21:20, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Why speedy deletion? CSD G11

Why was this tagged as advertising? The article's subject is a company, but what was considered inappropriate content? It is properly referenced and (as far as I believe) written in NPOV. Bren ^talk 10:52, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Umm, because it's blatant advertising and self-promotion perhaps? The links include one to the company's own website and the other three appear to be to news sites hosting paid advertising. Those advertorials contain trivial details which do not establish notability. The article reads like an advert. There is nothing particularly unusual or encyclopaedic about the company that I can see. The company fails WP:CORP and does not belong in an encyclopaedia. —Moondyne 11:45, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

This article is not self-promotion as I do not work for the company and are completely independant from them. Links to the news sites The Age, Fox News, and the Channel 10 News clip are not for advertising; I was citing what I believe to be legitimate sources. The company is an internationally recognised fashion brand, particularly ouside Aus. Bren ^talk 13:05, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Just happened to be watching this as I did the DYK updating. I can't see very much wrong with this, to be honest. I am aware that the brand has a modish currency with certain sectors of the market, in Australia, the US and the UK. -- ALoan (Talk) 14:32, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough and thanks. I'll remove the tags. —Moondyne 14:46, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Images

Does AussieBum wonderjock.jpg really have to go on this article? I know it's free from Commons, but aussieBum is an Australian company, so whilst it does produce Patriot Canada underwear, I feel that it doesn't really go. Also, there is already an underwear shot of the Undies range, and I don't mean to be rude to anyone who spends time donating their work to Commons; but the Undies guy is far more "aussieBum model" material and the shot looks more professional. Your thoughts please? --Breno ^talk 06:05, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree can it please go. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.170.12.192 (talk) 15:00, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps someone can find a public domain "aussieBum model" photo of the Wonderjock? These are the main cause of aussieBum's recent international sales growth and created a lot of press interest (ref. "around 90 percent of aussieBum’s business is in international sales and they now sell into 75 countries"[1]). As for the Patriot range these exist in styles for a lot of countries, deliberately pitched at the international market, so a non-Oz version could be argued to be more representative. Ashley VH 17:26, 11 October 2007 (UTC)