Talk:Audemars Piguet/Archive 1

Dominance versus Rolex
How is Audemars more "dominant" than Rolex?

This article is a joke.BulldogPete 16:39, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Share sold
The 40% share in Jaeger Le Coultre was sold in 2003 to the Richemont Group. Article contains mistake. Pcstas 20:08, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Logo AudemarsPiguet.gif
Image:Logo AudemarsPiguet.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:34, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Logo AudemarsPiguet.gif
Image:Logo AudemarsPiguet.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 03:54, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Request for Audemars Piguet
Hello, I worked on a draft on the Audemars Piguet page. I am looking for an editor to review it before editing it on the live page. Here's the link to the draft: User:Solarys-fr/Audemars Piguet If you have any questions, don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Thanks! Solarys-fr (talk) 09:58, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Editing the Audemars Piguet page
Hello, I edit the draft on the Audemars Piguet live page. I followed some advice from a Wikipedian about my draft. I hope it will be ok for you! Thanks Solarys-fr (talk) 14:36, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

I re-added "In the Media" section. Someone requested that I provide a source to the fact that the watch is part of the film Quick Change, and I attached a link to the film's script which you can search for the brand. Please do not delete the In the Media section if you are frustrated by the lack of sources, simply delete the unsourced items. Moreover, the In the Media section is 1) very useful and 2) pretty easy to confirm as a source simply by checking out that media. Not sure the standards for sourcing a brands inclusion in songs/movies needs any more designated source than listing the title and/or artist. (7 Dec 2015)

Trivia section
A pile of "in popular culture" material has just been readded. I'd call this material unsourced trivia. What do I misunderstand? -- Hoary (talk) 01:37, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Edits to the Audemars Piguet page - Ben 22:57, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
I would like to keep my version for the following reasons:

Some, but not all examples of grammatical errors/awkward wording as follows

 * 1) "Audemars Piguet is a highly regarded watch manufacturer in the world. It is particularly known for introducing the Royal Oak wristwatch in 1972, which helped the brand rise to prominence in watchmaking industry, but it has also introduced several other notable models. One of Audemars Piguet's achievements was creating the first jumping-hour wristwatch in 1921. The company also introduced the world's first skeleton watch in 1934 and has produced some of the thinnest watches in the world."
 * 2) "Jules Louis Audemars and Edward Auguste Piguet had known each other since their childhood, but were only reconnected in their early twenties in 1874."
 * 3) "The second generation of the company leaders included Paul Louis Audemars and Paul Edward Piguet, and the third generation included Jacques Louis Audemars and Paulette Piguet."
 * 4) "In 1970s, Audemars Piguet rose to an important position in watchmaking industry, especially after introducing the Royal Oak model. As of 2018, the current generation (4th) of the company leaders are both from the Audemars family, Jasmine Audemars and Olivier Frank Edward Audemars.  The company is an active member of the Federation of the Swiss Watch Industry FH."
 * 5) "A company slogan & trademark of Audemars Piguet is "To Break the Rules, You Must First Master Them". The slogan was introduced in 2012."
 * 6) "In 1986, developed the an ultra-thin automatic tourbillon wristwatch, being only 5.3 mm thick (including the case)"


 * First of all, all of the above statements are well supported by reliable online sources. (Note that you have copied an old version to this Talk Page; the number "5.3mm", for instance, is now further supported by Audemars Piguet's official publication: Page 32-33 in ). So content-wise, I do not think there is anything wrong. Secondly, I'd appreciate if you can explicitly point out the types of grammatical errors in these statements, and explain why they are wrong. Or, what are your recommendations for improvement of the wording? Otherwise, I would argue that it is your personal idiosyncrasy to think they are "awkward". The background of this is that I have a PhD degree and teach at a world-class university. I have dozens of peer-reviewed publications and have peer-reviewed hundreds of papers and articles. Therefore, with all due respect, I think it is a rather bold claim from you that there are a lot of grammatical errors in this article (typos don't count).


 * On the other hand, I think your edited words "The most notable of Audemars Piguet's achievements was ..." are not proper for a Wikipedia article, since claiming "most notable" without having reliable supporting sources is against No original research and Neutral point of view.OxbridgeGate (talk) 23:27, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Main source for the "notable inventions and patents" section has major flaws and results in misleading/straight up false information

 * Referenced as source 9 on the actual page
 * Non reputable E-commerce site that makes several false claims including non verified measurements and dates
 * The Foundation Haute Horology site was used earlier in the article and is an actual reputable source for this information
 * Offending statements
 * 1) "In 1986, developed the an ultra-thin automatic tourbillon wristwatch, being only 5.3 mm thick (including the case)." Date is wrong, description of device is misleading, and measurements are not verified
 * 2) "In 1996, developed the world's first automatic Grande complication watch." Date is wrong
 * 3) "In 2006, introduced the world's first direct-impulse escapement." Somewhat irrelevant and is not listed on many other sites as a notable achievement including the FHH site
 * 4) "In 2008, the first watch with a carbon case and carbon movement was developed." Date is wrong and there is no other source that mentions a carbon movement


 * Each entry for "notable inventions and patents" is supported by at least two reliable online sources, and source 9 has been replaced. You seem to have copied an old version to this Talk Page, but for your so-called "offending statements", 1) "1986" is supported by FHH source and "5.3 mm" is supported by AP's official publication; 2) "1996" had been updated to "1995/96", now supported by a FHH source and Sotheby's; 3) three sources including two FHH sources support the statement, and I'm not sure why it's "irrelevant" (it might be your own judgement); 4) again, "2008" had been updated to "2007/08", supported by a FHH source and Sotheby's. Note that in 2) and 4), the introduction of a movement or technology does not have to be in the same year as the launch of a watch model (end product) containing that movement/tech.


 * Finally, according to No original research and Neutral point of view, if you think any of the online sources is wrong, you will have to provide another more reliable or reputable source to support your claim - you cannot simply use your own opinion or judgement. Thanks. OxbridgeGate (talk) 23:40, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

The gold producing nations graph does not belong and should be removed

 * The graph does not deal with Audemars Piguet.


 * Companies like AP, PP and Rolex are explicitly mentioned in the report of World Wide Fund not to reveal their sources of raw materials, especially gold, and how they handle these materials in manufacturing (e.g., pollution). According to the report, they received the lowest rating mainly because of this. Why is this serious? Because improper gold mining and handling causes huge environmental issues, and the graph is just a part of the statement involving gold mining issues in developing countries such as China, Russia and South Africa. I think the logic is sound and the statements with graph are informative. OxbridgeGate (talk) 23:53, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Over Citing

 * There are several instance where statements contain an absurd amount of citations


 * Please note that I added several more references to this article in response to your original removal of well-sourced statements in this article. In short, I added the sources to convince you, because I think you used your own judgement (not evidence) to remove statements. If you agree not to remove well-sourced statements in the future, I think it is possible to abandon some of the citations. OxbridgeGate (talk) 23:53, 2 February 2019 (UTC)