Talk:Urban Behavior

Fashion Low‑importance

	Fashion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fashion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fashion on Wikipedia. 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Brands Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Canada: Toronto Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Toronto (assessed as Low-importance).

Notability, COI, etc[edit]

Firstly let me just say I don't hold any opinion about this company (never heard of them until this article came up). Now with that out of the way there are several issues which need to be addressed firstly there is a definite COI with Cmt marketing. I'm not aware of a source for the China part of the article he/she keeps removing (and that is why I added that a citation was needed. Just as I've added previously that a citation was needed about the 80% market/sales thing (which CMT recently removed). I've done some google searches and can't find 3rd party sources about the company at the moment and therefore have tagged the article as such. I'm willing to work with editors to help get the content on this article in good shape but, we need to work together and not against each other to do it. As it sits at the moment the article would probably be easily deleted under our criteria for Spam. Can we address these two big issues and get on with contributing contructively to Wikipedia? Jasynnash2 (talk) 14:12, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've shopped at this chain before in Canada and I'm aware they have northern U.S. locations. I would hardly consider this spam or advertising given the extensive articles that exist about other retailers. If stores like Ruehl No. 925 can have articles about their history and even give lists of store locations, this article shouldn't be treated differently. Certainly this article needs work but I disagree that it doesn't qualify for inclusion. KINGBOBOFTHENORTH —Preceding unsigned comment added by KINGBOBOFTHENORTH (talk • contribs) 22:40, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]