Talk:Filson (company)

Edit war over CNN Money description

Just posting to expand my thoughts about a sentence that is being edit-warred over. The sentence is "Filson is known as a provider of rugged, quality outdoor clothing in classic designs." This paraphrases a source's description of the company's products. Two problems here: first, we are taking an author's opinion and presenting it as fact in Wikipedia's voice. Second, the author paraphrased, a writer for CNN's Money division would not be seen as a recognized authority on clothing quality. Caveat - I agree with the characterization, Filson does make tough, high-quality gear. But articles are for facts, and opinions clearly attributed to authoritative sources. I ask the IP editor to engage here rather than continuing the edit war. Thanks, The Interior (Talk) 13:49, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

By the way, the other work done to the article by the IP editor was excellent, and I personally appreciate the detailed referencing. The Interior (Talk) 16:20, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

A refresher on Neutral Point of View - WP:NPOV reads, literally from the first sentence, "Editing from a neutral point of view (NPOV) means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without bias, all of the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic." You need to prove that the characterizations I have made are 1) representing unfairly 2) not proportional 3) failing to represent all of the significant views published. Its up to you to go find and quote reliable sources that describe the goods as "poorly-constructed" or "low-quality" or whatever you feel more fairly represents the body of published work that describes Filson's products. This isn't based on your opinion of what is or is not promotional or subjective, its based on what others have published as evaluated under the criteria outlined in NPOV. Prove that I have introduced information into the article that does not represent the majority of opinion by finding a few contradictory sources and listing them here. I'll read them and we'll take it from there. 174.21.136.124 (talk) 01:04, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I think we're headed in the wrong direction here. At present we say, in Wikipedia's voice that "Filson is known as a provider of rugged, quality outdoor clothing in classic designs" We are making a subjective assessment of the brand. We don't do this in articles. Let's read a bit further into WP:NPOV, specifically this section: WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV. If we do offer a subjective statement about the quality of something, it must be attributed to the person making the statement. Further, the person must be in a authoritative position. E.g., we could say "Phil Bourjaily, of Fortune Magazine and CNN Money, said that Filson has a "reputation for ruggedness and quality." But we wouldn't, because the obvious reaction to reading that is "Why does Phil Bourjaily's opinion matter here?". To which we have no answer. Do you see where I'm coming from here? I'll add that the burden of sourcing a statement is on the editor who wants to include it. It is not up to dissenting editors to disprove the statement. Unless there is a very authoritative source we can find that explicitly opines that Filson gear is "rugged" and has "classic designs", we should avoid subjective descriptions, and stick to the history and concrete facts about the company. The Interior (Talk) 02:10, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Edit request to correct text

Hello. My name is John and I recently have a Wikipedia account to update the Shinola (retail company) page by submitting requests for others to review. I have a request related to Filson (company), which is the sister company of Shinola (retail company).

I've noticed the final sentence of the Ownership and leadership section has some incorrect text:

• Under new leadership, they are closing down in-house production and focusing more on brand licensing.

The source cited is an 11-year old article and the characterization is outdated and not correct. Based on a recent source I've shared below, I propose the following changes (see bold):

• Under current leadership, Filson has made organizational changes to streamline its business, including a decision to reduce positions in its Seattle and Kent manufacturing facilities. The company continues manufacturing heritage styles in its Washington facilities.

This source confirms manufacturing remains in U.S., and adds details on workforce decisions.

I'm not editing the article directly because of my conflict of interest, so can someone please review the proposed changes and update the page on my behalf? Thank you! JS at Shinola (talk) 18:23, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done. Heartmusic678 (talk) 14:40, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Filson strategy and retail

@Heartmusic678: Thank you once again for assisting with this Filson request last year. One of the edits appears to have been edited again, and in the process an error inserted. Also, the

Currently, the "Early History" section ends with, "Under current leadership, Filson has made organizational changes to streamline its business, including a decision to reduce positions in its Seattle and Kent manufacturing facilities and start having their products outsourced to factories in China to increase profits." There is no sourcing on the "China" claim (which is incorrect). Also, for the sake of alignment with what the company has said and done, and what was reported in the story that is used for sourcing, I propose changing the text to "Under current leadership, Filson has made organizational changes to streamline its business and be more efficient, including a decision to reduce positions in its Seattle and Kent manufacturing facilities and shift more production overseas."

Additionally, the "Retail locations" section says, "In addition to the company's retail website, Filson features flagship locations in Seattle, Washington, and Union Square, New York City, as well as brick-and-mortar stores in Portland, Oregon, San Francisco, California, Plano, Texas, Edina, Minnesota, Boston, Massachusetts Washington, D.C., Ballard, Seattle, Naperville, Illinois, and Seattle–Tacoma International Airport. Outside the US, there are stores in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, and Tokyo, Japan.

Filson maintains one outlet store, located in Eagan, Minnesota."

This is not accurate. For accuracy, I propose changing the text to "In addition to the company's retail website, Filson features flagship locations in Seattle, Washington, and Union Square, New York City, as well as brick-and-mortar stores in Portland, Oregon; San Francisco, California; Plano, Texas; Edina, Minnesota; Boston, Massachusetts; Washington, D.C.; Ballard, Washington; and Naperville, Illinois. Outside the US, there are stores in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, and Toronto, Ontario, Canada. : Done

Filson maintains one outlet store, located in Eagan, Minnesota."

Thanks for reviewing, JS at Shinola (talk) 18:06, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

@JS at Shinola:. Hello, your request has been answered. Heartmusic678 (talk) 11:33, 24 January 2022 (UTC)