Talk:Columbia Sportswear

This article makes no mention of Columbia's business in Canada. Columbia Sportswear Canada has been in the news recently for its announced move from Strathroy Ontario to London Ontario, where it acquired a large industrial property to consolidate its two previous facilities. The Canadian business was established by Doug Hamilton in 1988, who distributed Columbia apparel under license. It was subsequently purchased by the parent company, with Hamilton continuing as president.

So I'm not sure whether its omission from the article is an oversight or if the operation in Canada is considered to be outside the scope of the main article. Comments? Lyn (talk) 02:44, 30 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

While some mention is warranted, given the likely overall impact of those operations is minimal, and the coverage would also likely be less. So per WP:UNDUE, a small mention is about it. Aboutmovies (talk) 06:58, 30 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Columbia Sportswear. 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/20080620054345/http://www.highroadsports.com/news/173-Columbia-Sportswear-Company-and-High-Road-Sports-Announce-New-Team-Columbia-to-Debut-at-2008-Tour-de-France to http://www.highroadsports.com/news/173-Columbia-Sportswear-Company-and-High-Road-Sports-Announce-New-Team-Columbia-to-Debut-at-2008-Tour-de-France

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 09:13, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi. They escaped the nazis, but the company logo is a type of svastika. Any background story? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.123.23.43 (talk) 11:38, 13 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

You seem to be on a crusade here. A Q&A from Amazon fails as a WP:RS and cannot be used. While the other source mentions this, it is an obscure source and they seem to disagree there is any connection given the company's background. Aboutmovies (talk) 16:47, 9 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

For later, when a source acceptable to Aboutmovies shows up on Google: the fact that the logo is designed to suggest a tight kind of weave makes perfect sense to me and I am fully satisfied that this is both fact and the company's position. Here is the text removed by Aboutmovies, to be restored if and when such a source emerges (no need to waste a useful text fragment):

When asked about the resemblance between the company logo and a swastika, a Columbia representative explained that the logo depicts the tight, high-quality weave of the signature fabric used for its garments and that any resemblance with the Nazi emblem is completely unintended, also pointing at the Jewish origin of the company founders who fled Nazi Germany to the USA.^[1]

The net is full of people fantasising about the topic and WP can help out. "RS" and other guidelines are just that, guide-lines, not additions to the Ten Commandments, and WP is not the handbook to the red button to the Bomb, but that's often hard to convey to some. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 21:10, 9 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

See WP:NOT and in general perhaps learn what Wikipedia is here for and what it is not. It does not exist to answer every little piece of trivia out there. While RS is "only" a guideline, WP:V is a policy and it requires RS, so, no RS means you don;t insert random trivia that despite this page existing for more than 10 years only now does this come up. What Wikipedia strives to be is authoritative, accurate, and verifiable. What newbies seem to not get is that the accuracy of Wikipedia has often been questioned, and when information is sourced to a Q&A on Amazon that hurts the reputation. Is it the handbook to the bomb, no; but if you want to get your information out there nothing is stopping you from publishing it on your own blog where you can have your own rules. Aboutmovies (talk) 04:23, 10 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

Columbia 2804:14D:BE85:9476:EC5F:D1B8:30F4:B4BB (talk) 17:41, 21 November 2022 (UTC)Reply