Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:28, 2 May 2011

Fashion Start‑class Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fashion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fashion on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FashionWikipedia:WikiProject FashionTemplate:WikiProject Fashionfashion Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article has been marked as needing an infobox.

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article was nominated for deletion on 6 April 2011. The result of the discussion was keep.

Deckers vs Australia

I have been following this debate for a number of years now and would like to make the following observations and suggestions. 1. There is no doubt that the Australian manufacturers have been actively fighting Deckers in this section and using it for self promotion. 2. There is also no doubt that the word UGG or ugg can be and has been used as a marketing tool on thousands of websites to help sell “Generic ugg boots”. 3. Deckers do own trademarks in almost every area outside of Australia and New Zealand and have now defended their marks in several countries in various courts of law. 4. Deckers have the vast majority of worldwide sales and are responsible for the vast increase in these boots sales due to their marketing efforts. 5. Since Deckers sales have increased so much in recent years, dozens if not hundreds of companies and individuals have jumped on the bandwagon and used the internet to tout that they are selling “real Ugg boots from Australia”. In doing so they are breaking international trademark laws and put their poor customers in risk of having their order confiscated when it arrives in the US, Europe etc. 6. None of these Australian companies complaining about the name can legally sell generic “ugg boots” in any store (wholesale) outside of Australia if the word ugg is on the product or packaging. 7. While Deckers has considerable internet sales, it is only a very small portion of their overall sales. Considering that Deckers dominate this category and that, while their sales are impressive, the larger portion of sales come from their wholesale business which doubles at retail. Therefore, the market share of this style of boots for Deckers is by far more than all the websites selling these boots and complaining about what is now a brand that is known all over the world.

While I agree about having a smaller section dedicated to “Ugg boots from Australian and new Zealand”, there is massive and overwhelming use of the truly generic term “Sheepskin Boots”. This term is used by Deckers to generically describe this style and by most of these Australian companies that are fighting this loosing battle over Deckers trademarks. Additionally, there is a substantial amount of legitimate “Brands” that both wholesale and retail sheepskin boots all over the world including Australian and New Zealand. These brands include, EMU, Koolaburra, Bearpaw, Aussie Dogs, Warmbat, Green Lizard, Love from Australia, Koalabi etc, etc. I would dare to speculate that their sales are considerably more than the opportunistic internet retailers that are still bitching and moaning about the name ugg.

One look at the Ugg N Rugs operation would confirm that many of these are nothing more than a small cottage industry that is pissed off that they have missed the boat and that many of their boots are returned by customers who actually wanted Deckers UGG boots. Look at their disclaimers in their sites to confirm this.

In summary, I hope that a the editors will create a “Sheepskin Boots” section as it seems unfair for all these other legitimate Brands to be labeled as “Ugg boots” or “Ugg like” as it unfairly places Deckers in the position of the original and the others as copies. This seems like a fair compromise and allows any other individuals or companies to go out and sell their goods through their own merit and not by falsely misleading the consumers who are free to choose other legitimate sheepskin boot brands, Deckers included, without being confused over what this name means here or there. --Illume1999 (talk) 20:26, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

I am putting together a main category titled “Sheepskin Boots” and welcome the editor’s help in doing so. The largest worldwide trend in footwear is Sheepskin boots and has been for the last 8 years. While I do understand that in Australia they are referred to commonly as “ugg boots”, Australia is only a fraction of the worldwide population.

It is not logical for Misplaced Pages to only have two options: 1. Ugg boots – what sheepskin boots are called in Australia 2. UGG a worldwide brand owned by a single corporation.

It defies all of Misplaced Pages’s principles to only acknowledge that for 99.9% of the world, this category has no generic term to describe this style of footwear.

If UGG is a brand name in 99.9% of the world, as this community has ultimately confirmed, then what is the generic term for this style of footwear? The answer is of course “Sheepskin Boots”.

I have compiled a list of just some of the companies that refer to this style of boots as “Sheepskin Boots”

Sheepskin Boots: UGG, EMU, Koolaburra, Aussie Dogs, Warmbat, Green Lizard Australia, Love from Australia, Koalabi, Ausiie Boots Australia, Shepherd, Jumbuck, Overland, Shoo Republic, Seekin, Celtic, Morlands, Mou,

Sheepskin “Lined” Boots: Lamo, Sketchers, Chooka, Bearpaw, Old Friend, Staheekum, Minnetonka, Ricardo B.H., Lugz, Brodie, Flurries, Cloud Nine,

Sheepskin Boots are a worldwide phenomenon and have been in existence in some shape or form since the dawn of time. Let’s not only reference one fraction of the world population or a single company and deny the existence of this correct and totally legitimate generic term. I am suggesting that this becomes the landing page with sub headings as follows: • Ugg boots, a style of sheepskin boot that originated in Australia and New Zealand • UGG Australia a trademarked brand name for footwear, bags, clothing and other goods Lets all work together on this one to put together an impartial landing page for Sheepskin Boots.

--Illume1999 (talk) 15:35, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Generic Name for Australian Ugg boots for the rest of the world

It appears that this article is taking shape however, it is very difficult to get some consensus here as the article was so edited over night. I had only put out a first draft and had appealed for help in writing this article however, the references to "Australian sheepskin boots" were nearly all replaced with "ugg boots" and now we have an article that doesn't mention them at all.

The big question still remains, if 20 million people in Australian know the "Australian sheepskin boot style" as an "ugg boot", what shall the rest of the World's 6.908 billion people call them? And before another Australian editor says "ugg boots", that term is trademarked and cannot be used to describe the style "legally" outside of Australia. Its not an oppinion, this is an absolute fact. Should this ever change, that is a different matter but as of now, and for quite some time, this is the reality of the situation.

If this community doesn't like to call the style "sheepskin boots" or "Australian sheepskin boots", even though this is the term used today by international and Australian manufacturers, Industry buyers and consumers alike, what shall the "generic" term be for this style that is currently the biggest selling style of boots in the world?--Illume1999 (talk) 13:19, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Comment - Can this section os something like it be included in the new "Sheepskin boots" page?

Australian Sheepskin Boots

Australian Sheepskin boots today are one of the most popular trends of casual footwear and over the last decade, global sales for sheepskin boots have grown exponentially. One particular style that originated in Australia and is attributed to the Australian Surfing culture is the “Classic” Australian sheepskin boot (also known in Australia and New Zealand as ugg boots. The UGG brand is largely attributed to the dramatic increase in popularity and has successfully won over celebrities such as Oprah Winfrey who has featured the UGG brand sheepskin boots one of her favorite things for the last 5 years. Some other popular sheepskin boot brands are EMU, Koolaburra, Warmbat, Aussie Dogs, Green Lizard Australia, Love from Australia, Koalabi, Ausiie Boots Australia, Shepherd, Jumbuck, Overland, Shoo Republic, Seekin, Celtic, Morlands and Mou.

--Illume1999 (talk) 13:29, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Content forking

I've reverted the article back to the version written by Colonel Warden and RJHall. Duplicating content from ugg boots is an unacceptable content fork per WP:Content forking. As such, I've removed the duplicate material and returned it into an article about sheepskin boots in general. However, I've also added a paragraph about ugg boots, as it makes sense to include them in any general discussion of sheepskin boots - I've tried to keep it as neutral as I can, though, so hopefully that is ok. - Bilby (talk) 01:35, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks for reverting. As the Ugg topic seems disputed, we should not include any material about it which is not well-sourced. I have removed the sentence about the trademark/generic status because there was no source and, as I understand it, the matter is still under legal dispute. I'd like to see something about the slipper-like nature of the product. It seems that people have been using them as if they are true walking, winter boot but finding that they lack the design and structure for this. See Ugg-style boots 'damage feet due to lack of support, for example. Colonel Warden (talk) 06:30, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

This article is not about ugg boots, it is about the name that they are called everywhere outside of Australia "Sheepskin boots" or "Australian sheepskin boots". There is a link to Deckers trademarks on the ugg boots page which shows they are all very live and current but this is not the place to discuss trademark issues, as that is more than covered on the various "Ugg" pages. Apart from a mention that "Ugg boots" is the common name in Australia, the content here needs to be about "Australian sheepskin boots"--Illume1999 (talk) 13:14, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Colonel Warden, your edit is very nice and you have well researched this and I thank you for the time that you have invested to get this working. Could we all agree to do the following?

1. Title the section on this style to "Australian sheepskin boots" (as per rough below)

2. Move the design section from the "ugg boots" page to this page to avoid any duplication.

3. Leave the "ugg boots" page as is and leave that "very detailed" history there where it belongs

4. Put back into the this section the other "global brands"

5. Add see also, ugg boots, UGG Australia

Australian sheepskin boots

Along with their ability to provide warmth in cooler climates, sheepskin boots with the fleece on the inside are both comfortable and have the ability to draw moisture away from the skin. Thus this style of sheepskin boot became popular with Surfers in Australia, where they are known as "ugg boots". Outside of Australia and New Zealand, the style was popularized by Deckers Outdoor Corporation through their UGG Australia brand, and became a successful fashion trend.

Other popular sheepskin boot brands are EMU, Koolaburra, Warmbat, Aussie Dogs, Green Lizard Australia, Love from Australia, Koalabi, Ausiie Boots Australia, Shepherd, Jumbuck, Overland, Shoo Republic, Seekin, Celtic, Morlands and Mou.

Design

Note - move entire design section from "ugg boots" page and insert here.(change "ugg boots" to "sheepskin boots" in the copy)

Cheaper Versions

Some variations of Australian sheepskin boots have also been made by combining leather and sheepskin lining which is a much cheaper process and usually sell for much less than pure sheepskin boots. The Bearpaw Company uses this process exclusively on all of their sheepskin boots. There are also synthetic boots. Although derided as "fake" by some in the industry, their lower price made them appealing to large retail chains such as Wall-Mart.

Foot Problems

In 2009 American podiatrist Ed Chairman raised concern that the regular wearing of Sheepskin boots by UGG and other manufacturers could be deleterious to foot health due to the lack of arch support. Some companies have improved their design and have added arch support and other advanced features to their products (3 new references below)

See also:

ugg boots

UGG Australia

(refferences to be added -)

1. http://www.emuaustralia.com/story.asp (Click on features and benefits)

2. http://www.warmbat.com/en/features

3. http://www.greenlizardaustralia.com/sheepskin_boots/products.html

I feel that this would be a very nice section and it would leave the "ugg boots" page dedicated to just information on this style in Australia, its history and trademark issues while generic things like design are on this main page. This would leave Decker's UGG page about that company and also its various trademark issues.--Illume1999 (talk) 16:09, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

• What's needed to support such accounts is good sources. I just checked the Oxford English Dictionary and they have Ugg/Ug under the heading of Ugh, describing it as "A proprietary name for a type of soft, sheepskin boot." and saying that the origin is "Probably the name Ugh of a series of cartoon characters (see Alphabetical Index Constituent Particulars of Trade Marks 1966 (Canberra 1967) IX. 73).". So, I'm inclined to call them Ugh boots here as the OED entry indicates that the term is well-established in the English language. Companies which make this style of boot might be listed if they are notable and have their own articles. Lesser companies may not warrant such treatment - it depends on the sources. And, generally, an extended treatment of the trademark disputes belong on the specific pages which cover them. Colonel Warden (talk) 17:15, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

You have stated that the Oxford English dictionary confirms that it is "a proprietary name for a type of soft, sheepskin boot" so, the "Generic" not "Proprietary" name outside of Australia that all major companies, including Deckers, use is "Australian sheepskin boots". We have the propriety name covered on the UGG Australia page and ugg boots page.

"A trademark or trade mark or trade-mark is a distinctive sign or indicator used by an individual, business organization, or other legal entity to identify that the products or services to consumers with which the trademark appears originate from a unique source, and to distinguish its products or services from those of other entities."

This article is about the generic name for this style that is used to describe this style of boots. It is not possible to refer to this style, anywhere that it is trademarked, as an ugh, ugg or ug boot as long as it is a trademark (http://www.keepandshare.com/doc/1834017/UGGglobaltms-pdf-march-31-2010-3-03-pm-88k?da=y). --Illume1999 (talk) 18:37, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

The OED refers to it as a "proprietary name." What does that mean, exactly? It means that the name is the property of someone. It is trademarked. The term "sheepskin boot" is the generic term used for the same item, used in nearly every country in the world. Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 15:09, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

On the ugg boots article's talk page, I tried to point out to you that this article would only be viable if it was to cover the full use of the term "sheepskin boots", rather than just copying content from the existing article to this. Colonel Warden's work covered what I argued then - that there are many types of sheepskin boots, one of which is known in its country of origin as ugg boots. Thus this article is now (correctly) about sheepskin boots in general, and ugg boots are listed as one of these types. - Bilby (talk) 22:40, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Added back the content acknowledging the most popular generic name outside of Australia "Australian sheepskin boots". Will leave design information in the ugg boot section--Illume1999 (talk) 13:13, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Google disagrees with you: it gives about 25,000,000 hits for "ugg boots" and about 700,000 hits for "Australian sheepskin boots"; therefore the most popular name worldwide is "ugg boots" and they should be referred to as such as per WP:COMMONNAME. Daveosaurus (talk) 13:24, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Dave, the same Googlefight stunt was tried over at WP:AFD. I'm going to use the same antiaircraft gun to shoot down this argument. First, how can you tell from Google whether each individual page was talking about "ugg boots" (the generic term used only in Australia and New Zealand) or "UGG boots" (the brand name owned by Deckers trademarked in nearly every other country in the world)? Second, have you done your Google search in any language other than English? Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 18:26, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

The article on Wellington boot is a good example of how this sheepskin boots page should be. It acknowledges the history and "Other common Names" It goes on and lists and acknowledges all the popular names in several countries "Usage and terminology in other countries". This is the approach we need to this "Main sheepskin boots page"--Illume1999 (talk) 16:38, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

The Wellington boot article is an interesting example - I'd see it as the equivalent of "ugg boots", in that it is created under the original name, but then acknowledges that in much of the rest of the world they are called something different. In the same sense, "ugg boots" is created under the original name, and acknowledges that the name is not necessarily used in the rest of the world. As a comparison with sheepskin boots it doesn't work as well, as this article is focused on a range of different styles using the material, not the name. I note that Rubber boot, which is closer to this article, is a redirect to Wellington boot. - Bilby (talk) 22:40, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

There is a parallel between the "wellington boot" and sheepskin boots. They both have a long history, they have changed throughout the years (from leather to rubber for the wellington) and are today known by the most popular "generic" name. If wellington boots were a brand, that would not be the most popular name today and Misplaced Pages would refer to them by their generic name and also refer to the brand. The same is for Ugg boots, originated in Australia, known in Australia as Ugg boots but the rest of the world calls them "sheepskin boots" unless they are from Deckers and then they are called Uggs. Other boots with the name "ugg" on them that do not come from Deckers are commonly refered to outside of Australia as "Fugs" or Fake Ugg boots.--Illume1999 (talk) 13:11, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

First, as far as I am aware, they are not referred to as fugs. They may well be as a slang term, but that doesn't constitute a name in the same sense as "ugg boots". Second, your argument doesn't hold, I'm afraid. Wellington boot is not the most popular generic name, as per the article. In most regions outside of the UK they seem to be called different names. But as they were invented in the UK, and are a UK style of boot, we use the UK name. As ugg boots were invented in Australia, and are an Australian style of boot, we use the Australian name. We also, as per wellington boots, acknowledge any other names, but generally there aren't any other names that specifically refer to the ugg boots style, only the far more generic "sheepskin boots" which, as has been argued elsewhere, refers to more than just ugg boots. I think what you're arguing is that we should rename wellington boot as rubber boots, in order to match what the article suggests is the most common name, but that wouldn't really work.

If you want to merge ugg boots with this article you're welcome to start a discussion, once the AfD is over, but I can't see that you'll get consensus for the merger. The content is such that it is better treated as a separate article. Otherwise, we seem to have a viable approach here - talk about boots made from sheepskin in this article, and link to specific instances as they gain articles of their own.

At any rate, we seem to be arguing in circles. - Bilby (talk) 13:35, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Bilby, of course I am not suggesting to change wellington boots to rubber boots. I am using this as a reference that may be a good platform for sheepskin boots which is being widely accepted by the way. Ugg boots would be the common name in Australian and New Zealand. For the rest of the world, the common name is "Sheepskin boots" or specifically "Australian sheepskin boots". As far as Fugg boots today, here are some references to "fugs" (fake UGGs) which is now popular culture, outside of Australia of course.

• http://www3.merriam-webster.com/opendictionary/newword_search.php?word=fug
• http://news.scotsman.com/health/Beware-the-Fuggs-40That39s-fake.6153870.jp
• http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=fuggs
• http://www.luuux.com/fashion/fuggs-fake-uggs
• http://www.oprah.com/community/thread/27741

and there is even a Tee shirt http://www.zazzle.com/wait_so_if_fake_uggs_ar_called_fugs_are_rea_tshirt-235110943924399954 --Illume1999 (talk) 17:21, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately, we continue to argue in circles - you don't seem to get the point I'm making, and while I think I understand your point, I disagree. There's not much value in continuing this, I'm afraid. Short version - this article is currently about sheepskin boots in general, and you'll need consensus to merge the content from ugg boots, which I doubt will happen. - Bilby (talk) 22:08, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Definition of "Fug boots"

I have found some great pictures of "Fug boots" and a link that should be added to the sheepskin boots references. http://thevintageaviator.co.nz/node/1885 http://www.theaerodrome.com/help/glossary.php?pageNum_glossary=6&totalRows_glossary=86 --Illume1999 (talk) 20:41, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

The second link doesn't seem to be a picture, but I added a link to the first as part of an "External links" section. - Bilby (talk) 23:54, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

The end of AfD

Thanks to everyone for your participation in AfD. Even though we often disagree, I respect your opinions and your right to have them, and I am grateful for the courteous expression of those opinions. This subject somehow (probably through a talkboard) attracted the attention of a lot of new Misplaced Pages editors, easily identified by their red names at the ends of their posts. "New" does not necessarily mean "single purpose," because the first edit (or handful of edits) from any new account can appear single-purpose, and the SPA tag was applied a little too vigorously by a partisan editor at AfD. Please remember WP:AGF.

I've had email discussions with a lot of you regarding your votes in AfD, and your purpose in editing Misplaced Pages. Everyone denied being an agent for a manufacturer, but actions speak a lot louder than words. I am convinced that there are at least one agent for Deckers, and at least two for Australian manufacturers, working on this article and on Ugg boots. There isn't anything inherently wrong with that, but it can easily go astray. Please see WP:COI.

I am especially grateful to Donama for changing his vote at the last minute from "Delete" to "Keep." The discussion is here: Let's all work together to create a genuinely NPOV article. Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 14:43, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

We should all realise that at least one user who voted in that AfD has now been blocked as a sockpuppet and others were flagged as likely meatpuppets. Also please use the pronoun 'her' for me, P&W. Cheers, Donama (talk) 02:34, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

We should also realize that the four other accounts were reported by Checkuser as "unrelated" and since so many of them are new accounts, it's entirely possible that letting them edit for a few months will disprove the meatpuppet charge. Meanwhile charges of sockpuppetry, meatpuppetry or COI might be arguable on the other side of the fence. Let's all take a deep breath and just try to improve these articles together. Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 17:51, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

New accounts dont appear at AFD discussions they are always invited or invented, Illume invented one making claims of being the owner of a manufacturer even named that person. Your comments clearly speak of WP:CANVASS violations at best and meatpuppets of yourself at worst, irregardless each of those accounts have been tainted by your comments. If you think theres sockpuppetry by other editors please request a check at WP:SPI. Gnangarra 00:21, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

I think this has been well discussed. If the opinion is that this entry should be about all forms of Sheepskin boots then I commend the others for their candor. While our opinions about how "UGG" is used differ, I think this discussion has worked out very well. I'm not well liked on this page but I think this is positive work. Cheers.--Factchk (talk) 01:50, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Sour grapes I think, after the AfD failed from the guy who submitted it. I will point out that no evidence of WP:CANVASS violations has ever been presented. I suspect there's WP:COI going on in both camps. I will assume for the sake of WP:CIV and WP:AGF that the COI editors on both sides balance each other out. I also suspect there's a few talkboards somewhere on the Internet where these articles have become an item. One talkboard could be the home of fans of UGG brand boots, or it could be fans of some celebrity who wears them such as Kate Hudson or Sarah Jessica Parker. That's probably where we got all these newbie accounts. On the flip side, I suspect that the Australian sheepskin manufacturers' association has a talkboard of their own, and that may be where we got a few of the Aussies. Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 22:26, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Further improvement

So where do we go from here? How can we further improve this article? Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 17:01, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

I had posted some information on 2500 year old sheepskin boots and a link to the Discovery magazine source but Colonel Warden deleted this with the comment "So". I think this needs to be reinstated. The "see also" section was pointing to both Ugg boots and UGG Australia but was again changed and pointed to Fur clothing which is not really related and so these should be put back. The bottom of the page categories show boots and sheep but should be boots and sheepskin which is far more related. The reference to the American Hana Barbara cartoon caveman character "Ugh" seems to be totally unrelated and against all known theories of the origin of the name in Australia. Whats more this character was actually barefoot ( http://pericles.ipaustralia.gov.au/tmimages/cgi-bin/oracle_get_tm_images.pl?202978 ). I also think a page for EMU Australia should be built and more about the recent explosion of sheepskin boots in today's popular culture. --Illume1999 (talk) 17:15, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps we need to straighten out the organization. Right now we have several topics within a single topic heading. Perhaps we should break this down further so that folks could access specific sections with speed?--Factchk (talk) 17:41, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Factchk, this is definitely needed. As the Aussies are totally opposed to this article and have fought to try to keep it out, I suggest we nominate it as a "stub" and bring in other editors. There is much history and a lot of current information that needs to be added as well as pictures of "Sheepskin boots today" and their current popularity throughout the world (not just how they are viewed in Australia). --Illume1999 (talk) 15:34, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

I have indented everyone's posts in this section to keep them segregated. Illume, please do me a favor and just add whatever material you have to the article mainspace. Don't worry about organization. Just open your spigot and let it flow, but make sure that all of your statements are reliably sourced. I'll be watching and whenever you add something, I'll do the organizing into appropriate sections; and I may click on your links and make a few corrections here and there as needed. I will also watch out for such things as spelling, grammar, punctuation and encyclopedic style. Once you've got all the material into the article mainspace and I've got it roughly organized and edited to about a "B" standard, we can worry about the fine tuning.

I'm not so sure that nominating it as a "stub" is appropriate, particularly with the new material that you're about to add — you've indicated it is fairly substantial. A 500-word article cannot reasonably be described as a stub. But there are other avenues we have available at Misplaced Pages to bring in experienced editors. Allow me to explore those for you; and if you're dissatisfied with the results in a few weeks, we'll try something else OK? Skoal. Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 18:55, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

I added a more complete section that was fair and factual but it was reverted within minutes. I think this version is fairly close to what this section should be.--Illume1999 (talk) 15:51, 2 May 2011 (UTC) be.

The difficulty is that you continue to add unsourced material, relying on original research, that has factual inaccuracies, is written from an UGG Australia POV, and, where it is correct, is already covered in ugg boots. At any rate, there is no need to duplicate content covered elsewhere, especially when the other coverage provides the full context. - Bilby (talk) 16:56, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Whatever is of actual encyclopaedic value in the section you added largely duplicates material from Ugg boots. Misplaced Pages readers should be assumed to have the intelligence and ability to follow a hyperlink. I have made some superficial fixes to your material to make it more neutral and less Deckers POV but it really needs the sort of substantial overhaul done to it which I do not have the time to perform. Daveosaurus (talk) 20:01, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

I've taken the liberty of properly indenting your comments to distinguish them. Failing to indent or "thread" them is mentioned as a form of tendentious editing and I don't want you to be accused of that. No, this is an encyclopedia for the entire world, not just Australia and New Zealand. Outside of Australia and New Zealand they're called "sheepskin boots" and the Deckers product is called UGG boots. Sometimes we may see references to all sheepskin boots as "UGG boots," but that's a popularization of the brand name ... in much the same way that all carbonated soft drinks are called Cokes and all blue jeans are called Levis.

Also, I have the pleasure/burden of working on the Barack Obama articles, where information is often duplicated between one article and another in the series. Some of the articles in the Obama series will dwell on certain material at greater length than others, as appropriate considering the topic of each specific article. So that's a common practice here at Misplaced Pages. We will see the same material in various forms, and at various lengths, at UGG Australia, Deckers Outdoor Corporation, Uggs-N-Rugs, Ugg boots and Sheepskin boots, and there isn't anything wrong with that. Use "citation needed" tags if you must; rearrange some of the material if you must; but please don't delete it, unless you can make a case that it is negative info about a living person per WP:BLP. Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 20:28, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

• Start-Class fashion articles
• Mid-importance fashion articles
• Fashion articles needing infoboxes