Talk:Harrods

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Misc.[edit]

What do you mean 'unsigned' comment. I certainly did sign it. Cheers. Fairlightseven —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.145.240.49 (talk) 19:55, August 26, 2007 (UTC)

Who is this Andrew Mayo character mentioned at the beginning of the history section? No explanation is given. Then suddenly we get 'Harrod' with again no explanation as to the connection, progress, etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.145.240.49 (talk) 16:43, August 26, 2007 (UTC)

It would appear to be very old vandalism that no-one noticed at the time. Earlier versions of the article have Charles Digby Harrod as the person who retires in 1889. I've corrected it. Daibhid C (talk) 14:29, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I've edited the following to arrive at a more NPOV [problematic material bolded], also removed some repetition:

BEFORE

Fur Harrods has however recently tarnished its reputation by starting to sell fur. In the late eighties, Harrods stopped selling fur claiming it wanted to make its store greener [this needs a reference - seems to be putting words in mouth of Harrods] , however fur has crept back into its stores, and currently, Harrods is now the only department store selling fur in the UK. Now the Knightsbridge store has regular anti-fur demonstrations against it. It is seeking an injunction against the activists, and as of writing this article, has managed to obtain a temporary injunction allowing only 3 activists within ten metres of the entrances of the store at a time. This explains the yellow chalk line bordering Harrods. The anti - fur activists are urging consumers to boycott Harrods until the store finally stops selling fur.

AFTER

In the late eighties, Harrods stopped selling fur. Recently it has resumed sale of fur, and currently, Harrods is now the only department store selling fur in the UK. The Knightsbridge store is the subject of regular anti-fur demonstrations. It is seeking an injunction against the activists, and as of writing this article, has obtained a temporary injunction allowing only 3 activists within ten metres of the entrances of the store at a time. This explains the yellow chalk line bordering Harrods. The anti - fur activists are urging consumers to boycott Harrods until the store stops selling fur.

Mark Nesbitt 15:51, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be a lot of confusion about exactly how many were killed by the IRA bomb. Different sources list 5, 6 or 9 dead

Articles/webpages that say 5 dead

Articles/webpages that say 6 dead

The follow says 9 dead in one part and 6 dead in the "in context box".

The following says 9 in one part and 5 dead in another part

I believe that 5 or 6 is the correct number. The weight of arictles seems to go with 6 so that is what I'm sticking with.

---

Maybe it would be better if we mention that different sources say different things?

Six appears to be the correct number. Three police officers died and many sites give their names and state that the total was six. The BBC [1] page seems to be surprisingly muddled, and it must be wrong because it says four police officers died. Mintguy 08:40 15 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I've emailed them to get them to correct it.Mintguy 08:44 15 Jul 2003 (UTC)
Which they've now done. Except there's now a discrepency with the number of injured, so I've emailed them again. Mintguy 14:41 16 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Reply from the BBC....

Thank you for your email to On This Day.

I have noted your comments and can confirm the final number killed by the Harrods bomb was six. The sixth victim did not die until Christmas Eve of that year which probably explains the discrepancy between the two casualty figures. I will pass on this information to the section which maintains the Northern Ireland timeline.

The reason there is still a discrepancy in the two figures for the numbers of injured in the On This Day report is because the casualty toll given in the story was based on information available at the time of the incident. All our reports are written as if the news had just broken and the context information is meant to provide any follow-up that is required. The final casualty toll will have been gathered possibly a day or two after the incident when all the injured had been officially accounted for.

Thank you once again for your interest in the site.

Regards On This Day BBC News Interactive

Mintguy 10:31 17 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Harrods in Buenos Aires[edit]

Does anyone know about the former Harrods branch in Buenos Aires that split off on its own some time ago? The physical building still exists with signs, although it is now empty. The guidebooks say it was formerly part of the UK Harrods.

This should be of some help. [2] 80.42.156.208

Cleanup[edit]

Policy WP:CU states that any editor tagging or listing an article for cleanup must:

Explain what needs to be done in a brief but specific manner in the article's talk page.

Apparantly this article has been so tagged since July, yet there is no sign of an explanation on this talk page. I can see nothing obvious about the article that deserves tagging, so I am removing the cleanup tag. -- Chris j wood 19:49, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Lol you've got to be kidding. The history section is subdivided into sections, but each section header just appears as a normal sentence. If you actually read the article, this will become clear.

Copyvio[edit]

The "History" section is actually a total copyvio from Harrods' own website and has been removed rather than placed on cleanup. A new history section will need to be written. --Vamp:Willow 11:12, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Warrants[edit]

I added this section on its own, but I am not sure whether it should be included under the Mohammad Al-Fayed title, or in its own right. I'd like to know what the watchers of this page think. Also, I believe the warrants are part of the Harrods "history" but as they no longer exist, should they appear on a wiki page? Again, i'd like to hear some thoughts. --Schgooda 16:11, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All part of the history of Harrods so seems good to me. Glad the Imperial Mark has gone as that seems to be more-or-less meaningless.Mark Nesbitt 17:45, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I would easily assume that the Emporor of Japan has no habit of shopping at Harrods, so no one has earned any Imperial Mark. --Stat-ist-ikk (talk) 18:08, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Street Fighter[edit]

There is no station on the London Underground called "Piccadilly Station". There is Piccadilly Circus, although since that is over a mile from Harrods it seems strange that it would apear in the game. Should it be Knightsbridge station, or is the game designers' London geography not up to much? 81.19.57.146

If you are driving in London, then go outside of the built up area, and there is Stonehenge....that is Sega for you.--Stat-ist-ikk (talk) 09:20, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Catering[edit]

From the "Compact Oxford English Dictionary": cater • verb, chiefly Brit. 1 (cater for) provide food and drink at (a social event). 2 (cater for/to) provide with what is needed or required. 3 (cater for) take into account. 4 (cater to) satisfy (a need or demand). Clearly, the fourth sense is the most appropriate. Therefore, "cater to" rather than "cater for" applies here. Also, "cater for" is almost unknown in American English except in the first sense of the definition, which is inappropriate in the Harrods context. Harrods is not a "caterer", a party-maker; it is a department store. PeterHuntington 04:46, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Prince Phillip Warrant[edit]

Speculation suggests that claims of Prince Philip's personal involvement in the death of Al-Fayed's son and Diana, Princess of Wales led to the warrant's removal. I'm removing this line. There isn't a shred of evidence, and the argument has no evidence or substance at all. W2ch00 21:00, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • You're absolutely right to do it, I wonder why I didn't notice that while cleaning up.--Targeman 11:13, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Store access[edit]

I removed the entire section listing opening hours, bus/tube stops nearby, etc. This is totally un-encyclopedic info. Even the opening hours of famous museums are not listed here - this kind of info belongs on the institution's website. --Targeman 12:11, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Harrods' Clientele[edit]

Nothing about the kinds of people who shop at Harrods and / or how Fayed has altered their marketing approach so as to attract moneyed tourists seeking a quintessentially English shopping experience, ironically given the total absence of English people shopping in Harrods (too expensive, too brash etc). 160.83.32.14 15:34, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Size[edit]

The lead reads:

The store occupies a 4.5-acre (18,000 m2) site and has over one million square feet of selling space in over 330 departments. This makes Harrods the one of the largest department stores in the world together with Macy's New York (the UK's second-biggest store, Oxford Street's Selfridges is a little over half the size with 540,000-square-foot (50,000 m2)[1] of selling space).

The lead seems to imply that Harrods is the largest store in England while Selfridges is UK's second-biggest store. But, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't 50,000m2 larger than 18,000m2. So, perhaps either take out the Selfridges reference or clarify the issue. --RossF18 (talk) 03:37, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know that's an old comment there, but just so there's an answer here on the page; the confusion appears to be that the lead talks about the size of the Harrods site (18,000m2) then says they have over a million square feet of selling space (without giving a m2 conversion), before comparing it to Selfridges only in terms of selling space. The numbers to compare are "over a million square feet" and "540,000 square feet". MorganaFiolett (talk) 09:09, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Harrods Interior Listed ?[edit]

The statement about Fayed having had the interior listed seems strange and vague. You can't simply have buildings or interiors listed - you have to apply to English Heritage, who have sole discretion. Also, that doesn't mean that nothing can ever be altered, it just means that you have to get permission. There are 3 levels of listing, does anyone know which applies to the Harrods interior, and to exactly which parts? Is the statement even true ? I haven't been able to find any independent verification.Oinky (talk) 17:31, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge history sections[edit]

I propose we merge sections Background, Significant events in Harrods' history, Criticism, Egyptian cobra, and 2010 sale into one "History" section just below the lead. They are all about the history of Harrods, but scattered all over both in placement and format (for example, the hideous trivia-list-style events section). If we don't, we'll end up with more scattering as the store makes news again and again, and they'll start to contradict each other. --an odd name 07:08, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I took the liberty of doing this, as the sections really were stupid (and the 2010 sale was covered twice). I'm not sure about the cobra, which may be trivia (as there is no mention of notability), but believe the criticism section should stand because its content is more important than its date. FMasic (talk) 21:10, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sale: Harrods vs Harrods Knightsbridge?[edit]

What exactly was sold by Mohammed Al Fayed to Qatar Holdings? The whole company including bank, airline, etc. or just the Harrods Knightsbridge location? Also, why use the term "Harrods Knightsbridge" if there is only one location? 66.31.76.221 (talk) 18:13, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dress Code[edit]

Harrods turns away a 15 stone woman? Really!? The citation says nothing of the sorts and a quick Googling leads to no other evidence. And even so, if it was true, it wouldn't mean her weight was the reason she was turned away and thus could be irrelevant. Sounds like a load of rubbish to me, remove it? Gul e (talk) 21:51, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/39591.stm I'll pop the cite in tomorrow. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 01:37, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm telling on you! Is it still common for celeb types to get the tabloids in when they are denied access? Where I live, nightclubs will more usualy admit people who are 23 or above. Atleast one pub has a door that says in English: NO CLUB COLOURS. I am from Norway, and I refuse to believe that Londoners do not know that dresscoding is common. My actual question: Do celebs still get in the tabloids just for being refused access? --Stat-ist-ikk (talk) 08:49, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Billion?[edit]

I am a Wikipedia editor from the US. When it states that Harrod's was sold for 1.5 billion pounds (I have no "L" key on my keypad), is that billion, as in one-thousand-millions, or as in one-million-millions? It might be desirable to replace the word "billion" by the correct numeral. 207.237.79.219 (talk) 03:41, 12 May 2012 (UTC) Allen Roth[reply]

As an article about an English business, it is the English billion (thousand million). Gareth E Kegg (talk) 20:49, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The real English (or rather, British) billion is a million million (10^12). However, for reasons I have yet to discover, the British government decided in 1974 to change the official definition to that of the American billion, one thousand million (10^9). It is perhaps best, to avoid confusion, to avoid the term completely. G7mzh (talk) 16:34, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Profanity?[edit]

Hey guys, student and n00b editor asking a question.

In the content section 2010 Sale, is the use of a profanity in the quote necessary? I know that it is a quotation but this may not count a encyclopaedic use.

Thank you,

A Clueless Student — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.98.230.39 (talk) 21:08, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote the section, and I feel the use of the quotation shows Fayeds passion for his business. The "F word" does have a habit of jumping off the page though. I do hope you become a fully fledged editor someday, though :) Gareth E Kegg (talk) 21:30, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for answering. I kinda get what you mean about it. ;) 92.19.53.141 (talk) 18:08, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've no problem with the profanity, but it does read rather disjointedly - perhaps his English is poor. However, that aside, should there not be a comma between bloody and fucking? Surely, one's allowed to punctuate a quotation.  Giano  21:20, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Products section[edit]

I think this is a bit vague and biased in favour of the store. Quality - I've brought stuff from here that's very poor quality. They also sell food, souvenirs, furniture etc. --Andrew 21:37, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Harrods in Bangkok, Thailand[edit]

The article makes no mention of other Harrod's stores around the world. E.g. Bangkok, Thailand. How come? http://hedonisthk.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/harrods-tea-room-bangkok-thailand.html --Rebroad (talk) 14:23, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Murder[edit]

Some one was murdered near Harrods in 2019. Two men have been arrested. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.48.238.18 (talk) 12:15, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dilbaro and al-Nazi have been arrested. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.48.238.18 (talk) 12:23, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

1912 catalog available[edit]

1500 pages of pictures and text

Volunteer transcription project done August 2020. A copy of this should somehow be in this article.

I am unclear on whether Commons or Wikisource accepts epub files, which is what this site distributes. I am also unsure if epubs go in Wikipedia. Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:25, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Harrods Limited is a department store located on Brompton Road in Knightsbridge, London, England.[4] It is currently owned by the state of Qatar via its sovereign wealth fund, the Qatar Investment Authority. The Harrods brand also applies to other enterprises undertaken by the Harrods group of companies, including Harrods Estates, Harrods Aviation and Air Harrods.[edit]

Harrods Limited is a department store located on Brompton Road in Knightsbridge, London, England.[4] It is currently owned by the state of Qatar via its sovereign wealth fund, the Qatar Investment Authority. The Harrods brand also applies to other enterprises undertaken by the Harrods group of companies, including Harrods Estates, Harrods Aviation and Air Harrods. 93.171.221.87 (talk) 21:22, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Harrods&oldid=1202939071"