Talk:Clothing industry

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 October 2021 and 9 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sunnydayreading.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Migrant workers
The section was poorly sourced. Specifically, claims attributed to bls.gov do not appear on the page cited. Moreover the second source cited professes to be a advocacy site and hence is not a WP:RS. Quoting it's material gives it WP:UNDUE weight and reeks of WP:SOAPBOX. Kleuske (talk) 00:05, 16 May 2017 (UTC)


 * This page is a nightmare to maintain- when I stopped over a couple of years ago it was firmly written in British English- but now I see US-isms creeping in and being uncorrected. Yesterday, we say the additions on a lot of WP:UNDUE (swamped) by details of a union problem in one counntry. This is a global article- so should be written from a all embracing perspective. Who today makes clothing- they all come from China (there is nothing I am wearing that was made elsewhere!) I am sure but haven't researched the Labour conditions in Shanghai, that they are produced by lower status workers who are victims of inmigration nor just immigration. In the past the tailoring in the East End of London was a niche occupation for Eastern European Jews- who were homeworkers on piece-work contracts. So my advices- globalise, ensuring the prominence is on East Asia. Do a separate article Migrant textile worker exploitation in XXXXXX when you have enough independent secondary sources see WP:Notability and then let an experienced editor carefully link this into here.--ClemRutter (talk) 09:02, 16 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Here from seeing the now closed AN/I section. has also committedcopyright violation. Note the embedded numbers in the text. For example, this edit introduced text copied from this: numbers 26, 27 ... That edit and possibly others should probably be revision deleted; I see a copyright statement at the bottom of the source page, although I'm not 100% sure who holds authorship for the text, and it's possible Monxogendermigrationclass found it elsewhere. On the other hand, in this edit, Monxogendermigrationclass restored their own previous text from this edit, but seems to have copied from the rendered text instead of the wikitext, hence the appearance of multiple [1] embedded footnotes. Yngvadottir (talk) 15:51, 17 May 2017 (UTC) .... I've now looked carefully at the new editor's work, and I think this is a complete summary.
 * They first added copyvio at 23:28 on 15 May (from an article by Verité, as I previously noted. No reference pointing to that source. At 23:34 they then replaced the embedded footnote numbers with the original footnotes, within Wikipedia citation templates, leaving the copyvio text. At 23:47 they removed the footnotes, and at 23:49 they added close paraphrasing from the same source. removed the material at 00:00 on the 16th.
 * At 00:10 on the 16th Monxogendermigrationclass restored it, still copyvio, adding extremely close paraphrasing from this article in Cultural Survival Quarterly (search for "nimble fingers"), again with no reference to the source. In their next edit, also at 00:10, they reverted themself, then at 00:11 they reinstated the unsourced copyvio from both sources.
 * At 00:13 they added referenced material from the article by María A. Gutierrez de Soldatenko; on my initial examination this does not appear to be closely paraphrased. Their following edits are changes to the heading. At 00:16 Kleuske again removed all their additions.
 * At 00:46 they reinstated the material from the Gutierrez article, adding a second paragraph/subsection from the same source. This edit again does not seem to be copyvio.
 * After another removal, at 18:01 and 18:06 Monxogendermigrationclass copyvio'd their own work, by pasting in the text from their previous work rather than the wikitext.
 * I'm going to request revision deletion of the copyright-violating edits, but the sources might well be useful for expanding the article. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:28, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * That's more serious than I thought. Thanks for the digging. Agree on RevDel. Kleuske (talk) 21:03, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Workers in the Clothing industries
Most of the clothing is made in rural and areas that are considered to be below low income. The reason being is because of the cheap labor. People that work in this industry get paid lower than the minimum. They work there because they have a family to feed, the conditions that work in are not proper but they have to work those long hours to provide something to their families. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cheese Smile (talk • contribs) 00:16, 29 October 2021 (UTC)