Talk:International Ladies Garment Workers Union

	Chicago portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Organized Labour Mid‑importance

	Organized Labour portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organized Labour, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Organized Labour 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.Organized LabourWikipedia:WikiProject Organized LabourTemplate:WikiProject Organized Labourorganized labour
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women's History High‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles 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.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Textile arts Mid‑importance

	Clothing portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Textile arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of textile arts 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.Textile artsWikipedia:WikiProject Textile artsTemplate:WikiProject Textile artsTextile arts
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

This article was the subject of an educational assignment in 2013 Q1. Further details were available on the "Education Program:St. John's University/Discover New York 570 (Spring 2013)" page, which is now unavailable on the wiki.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Kinga hc.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 00:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

Can someone find the song Look for the union label? thanks John wesley 22:23, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Correcting a correction

An anonymous editor wrote "they were founded in 1909, not 1900." Actually, no, it was 1900; the first big strike was 1909. According to the ILGWU's history of itself, "The Story of the ILGWU," published in 1935, it was founded on June 3, 1900 by a group of eleven men representing seven locals from Baltimore, Newark and New York. Italo Svevo 01:18, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sabotage in article

The article has been sabotaged in the "Early History" section. J. Kulacz 96.18.39.97 (talk) 02:28, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1908 strike

The IWD article says IWD began in 1909 in commemoration of the 1908 strike by this union. If this is so, then such a strike should be mentioned here. 37.99.35.34 (talk) 02:50, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union. 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/20050207074237/http://liberalparty.org/vargoarticlep1.html to http://www.liberalparty.org/vargoarticlep1.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:35, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Roosevelt and the 1934 strike

The article claims that someone in the ILGWU falsely claimed that FDR had called the strike. There's no citation. I believe this is lore, not fact, since the same is attributed to the Appalachian coal strikes of '33 but no one has ever been able to identify a real source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdottt (talk • contribs) 16:49, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Does ILGWU have apostrophe in its name or not?

@Alistair1978: I noticed you've made dozens of edits to different wikipedia pages, alleging a typo. I see variations of the name, including 1. International Ladies Garment Workers Union 2. International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union and 3. International Ladies' Garment Workers Union but either way per WP:COMMONNAME I'm in favor of International Ladies Garment Workers Union cc: @Beyond My Ken: ~ Shushugah (talk) 05:05, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I also noticed this is not the first time, you've been asked to seek consensus before making mass edits, particularly on apostrophies related to ladies. See ANI decision here ~ Shushugah (talk) 05:23, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

One simply has to look at the union's official logo (or "bug") here to see that there are no apostrophes in the name. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:26, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

By making these edits I was simply correcting the link text in line with the title of this article, which I think it was fair for me to assume was correct, given I can see no previous talk on the matter. By reverting these changes there is now an inconsistent mish-mash of formatting.

I do not accept that the article move to its present name had consensus. I do not consider that an old logo provides conclusive evidence of the correct name for this organisation. It's not unusual to stylise names in graphical logos - there are many examples of this.

A Google search quickly turns up the following reasonably reliable sources naming the organisation using the previous title of this article, according to correct English usage

Alistair1978 (talk) 21:42, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No matter what WP:COMMONNAME might be, according to Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Official_names the official name is what's key here. Based on these documents from 1920's and if anyone could confirm/provide legal letterhead/registration info from later, would settle the debate, e.g from here. That would mean this article's main title should be with apostrophes, while a redirect without apostrophes is created. ~ Shushugah (talk) 15:29, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]