Talk:Hugo Boss (businessman)

message: https://wwd.com/business-news/media/for-the-record-5204423/
https://www.group.hugoboss.com/files/Study_on_the_Companys_History_Abridged_Version_en_final.pdf  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8109:B40:2258:8C77:CFF8:B1DB:FD47 (talk) 04:37, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Study about Boss NS involvement 

message: This company should be shut down. The capital of the company today was built on war crimes. I don't care if all the founding board members are dead. The people today running the company are benefitting from these actions in WWII. CJ DUB 02:12, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: 2 words; war reparations. In any case, it's not the role of WP to decide which company ought to be shut down and which isn't. Further, you could argue that Lockheed Martin with its 130.000 employees should be shut down as well. War profiteer, y'know? --TVPR 08:49, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: HUGO BOSS AG are one of the world's leading fashion houses, especially for menswear and just because they have a bad history doesn't mean the company should shut down. You expect companies inside a regime of the time to ignore it and hope they don't get dragged into it? Please...--Djkinsella 19:11, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

text:  What silly and childish remarks. There is no prove of any "war crimes" and neither did they use any "Slave labour", which is a bogus term in the context anyway. --41.151.45.51 (talk) 20:14, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia talk pages are not meant for political campaigning. Hugo Boss used a small number of POW's. It did not commit war crimes. Even if it did, that is no reason to close it down. If it was a reason for closure most European and American (and all Chinese and Russian) firms would be shut.Royalcourtier (talk) 22:10, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nazis 

message: I request that the name of this article is changed to 'HUGO BOSS' instead of 'Hugo Boss'. The company, like many others such as the spelling of eBay or iPod etc chooses to write it's logo like that in all written documentation, employees must write it that way and the press are asked (not always comply) to that presentation too. 
If this can be approved I will also change the way the article is written with reference to the sub-brands of BOSS & HUGO again with the capital letters. 
The issue is that this article is primarily about the company NOT the person, if it was the person it should most certainly be 'Hugo Boss'. --Djkinsella 22:06, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request article name change 

message: Most of the comments here, as well as some text on the page (regarding the SS uniforms) are about the company Hugo Boss, not the person Hugo Ferdinand Boss. I think the text about the SS uniforms needs to go, since it has more of a connection to the company, rather than the person.
mnot (talk) 04:56, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is about the person, not the company 

message: What did he look like? What did his designs look like? --Navstar (talk) 01:32, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Hugo Boss (fashion designer). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130328012506/http://gawker.com/5843124/hugo-boss-apologizes-for-making-nazis-look-fabulous to http://gawker.com/5843124/hugo-boss-apologizes-for-making-nazis-look-fabulous
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:50, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I added the Dead link template to reference #4.  I'm 90% certain I used the template right, but it keeps displaying the date information as bare code.  Can somebody fix it? --JDspeeder1 (talk) 05:03, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 

message: Hugo Boss was not a fashion designer: in his lifetime, his company manufactured Nazi uniforms, but did not design them. The idea that he designed Nazi uniforms is a popular misconception, and as far as I know, his company was never even the sole supplier. It wasn't until after the war, and Boss' death, that the company HUGO BOSS became a fashion company, pivoting away from uniforms and towards suits. The HUGO BOSS brand was only introduced in 1970. Before this change, the business is best described as a clothing or textile company.
Further, I don't believe there is any citation here that establishes Hugo Boss as a "fashion designer" anyway, so describing him as one appears to be original research.
In light of this, it seems to me that the article should instead be titled "Hugo Boss (Businessman)" or some other such description. Battle1368 (talk) 23:02, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hugo Boss was not a fashion designer 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) 2pou (talk) 16:04, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 11 December 2022 

message: Or atleast half? is there anything known? 2A02:A44A:F69B:1:7C08:1516:C577:931A (talk) 07:35, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Was he eastern?