Guidance requested on contacting brands for additional info

When researching a new fragrance, I often have difficulty finding supporting evidence for a release year or other details. I would like to contact the brand to see if they can fill in the blanks, but I've never done this before. Should I indicate that I'm seeking this information so that it can be to be added to Parfumo, or am I more likely to receive a positive response as a curious individual doing independent research? Does anyone have any recommendations for how to frame the inquiry in the best way? 

Hey @DaisyThorn ! I typically just shoot the fragrance brand a message (customer service email, or message their business page on IG/FB) and ask for whatever I need.

I never mention Parfumo, since I'm not an official spokesperson/do not want to imply that I'm representing the platform in any way.

Example: "Hello! I love (insert fragrance name) - could I please get help with finding out what the release year was? Thanks so much!"

While waiting for a reply, I often put a note of that in the "Discussion" section - then attach a screenshot of their response for sources. Hope this helps! 🤗

Now I think I've messed up because I have mentioned Parfumo-- hopefully not in a way that implies I'm representing them, I just say I'm a user and contributor to their database.

I usually ask them if they have any old marketing copy about the perfume they'd be willing to share.

I'm clearly not Parfumo haha, but I'm sure you're fine 😅 asking for old marketing copy is great too!

Thank you for the recommendations!  This is very helpful. 😊

Would it be an acceptable source if I emailed a perfumer directly and got direct confirmation that they take credit for a specific perfume?

What about quotes in news/blog articles from the perfumer herself taking credit, even if they are on obscure websites? 

This is a question I have had too!  

Example 1: Tanja Duerloo (https://www.parfumo.com/Perfum...) has a store (https://www.perfumelounge.eu) and it is possible to search for her fragrances on the store's website (https://www.perfumelounge.eu/p...). Would this type of self-report be acceptable? Another issue is that it is possible that some of these were collaborations. So, another question: if it is a collaboration, is it OK to add only one of the creators if the other is unknown?

Example 2: I noticed this book on Amazon: The Ghost Perfumer: Creed, Lies, & the Scent of the Century, by Gabe Oppenheim, ISBN 9798786729215. I haven't read it, but the description suggests that some Creed perfumes were created by an uncredited perfumer, whom the author identifies. Would this kind of book be a credible source?  

Bumping this because my corrections to a handful of Creed perfumes were rejected despite listing credible journalist Gabe Oppenheim's book (mentioned above) as a source.

Non-fiction books are rigorously fact checked by professionals. I'm wondering why my revisions were rejected by the amateur editors here, when the information passed much more rigorous fact checking at a publishing house?

Wow, interesting. I'd say a book would be a very reliable source indeed. I checked your rejected revisions and was thinking maybe it was due to sources not being put in the right place in the right way (according to the rules/instructions)? Sources should be in "sources" tab instead of "discussion" tab. I have never provided a book source, however when providing a website source you must add screenshots too so maybe they would have required photos of the book and it pages telling about the new information..? I find it bizarre though that nobody cared to explain why the entries were rejected. Would have been handy to know so that people wouldn't make the same mistake twice.

Edit: Just checked that you haven't actually been the only one to propose the same thing with same source, some of those revisions have been rejected before too submitted by different users, and again without any explanation. So would indeed save everybody's time and nerves to just explain what was wrong with the source. However this is nothing new though, many Parfumo moderators aren't too keen on explaining anything for some reason even when it would ease their own workload. 🤷 

To answer this question: No, it would not be a credible source since this is no official brand / perfume company source (or a press outlet source that receives the information from the respective brands).

If the brand itself - for whatever reason - is unwilling to reveal certain perfumers, we won't rely on unauthorized third party sources where we don't know their original sources even.

In general, we would expect users to properly review the guidelines/knowledge base section before submitting, so they are aware what is needed. It is correct that the documentation was not properly executed. Possible remarks left in submissions should also be reviewed, in case more action is needed on the submitter's behalf.

However, Parfumo reserves the right to reject individual suggestions without giving reasons. This particularly applies if certain previously rejected information is submitted repeatedly.