# Talk:Navajo weaving

A public domain color photograph of Navajo Rug would improve this article.-Doktor Faustus 1 June 2007

I own several rugs -- I'll add this to my "to do" soon list.  WBardwin 05:48, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
One has been added from the commons. - PKM (talk) 08:24, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

This is pretty silly---85% of this is taken from Navajo people.  Nominate to MERGE immediately. --Dylanfly 19:23, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

It's been expanded now with more outside citations. DurovaCharge! 20:27, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

I've found considerable differences in terminology among different references on this topic.  The eye dazzler style is widely known as such, but many of the others here aren't mentioned in the sources at my disposal.  Moving this here for possible verification and expansion. DurovaCharge! 06:11, 25 December 2007 (UTC)


### Styles
There are many styles of rugs.

Chief
Crystal
Eye Dazzler - covered
Ganado Red
Klagetoh
Non Regional
Pictorial
Raised Outline
Storm Pattern
Teec Nos Pos
Two Greyhills
Wide Ruins
Yei Be Chei

The article mentions high prices in 1850 and high prices currently, so I set down to some arithmetic.  Doing math is sometimes considered a violation of WP:NOR and in this case I can sort of see why, but it sheds some light on the topic and detailing it here should spare the next person.  According to the link in the article [1] current rugs sell around $300-$1000.  According to [2] the mid-1800's US used a bimetallic standard gold = 22.5 grains/$, silver=371 grains/$.  Using 0.065 grams/grain and 1 troy ounce = 31.1034768 grams I work out $50 US = either $243.37 (in silver) or $1957.58 (in gold).  The substantial difference can be traced back to the Crime of 1873.
The bottom line:  calculating exact inflation over centuries is a job requiring experts, and you'd need a source to claim that $50 in the 1800's meant any particular amount of modern money.  But in a very crude, subjective sense it appears that the cost of a Navajo rug is roughly the same as it's ever been. 70.15.116.59 (talk) 19:14, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

The principle image seems a bit blurred to me.  Perhaps it's just my monitor or graphic cards, or the prescription in my contact lenses, but a burnt umber and black weave needs to be shown with really strong unsharp masks.  Primary colors always seem to have a bit of their complements surrounding them, and this makes the lines appear blurred even when they're not.  Utgard Loki (talk) 15:58, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I'll switch that around.  The Library of Congress archives had a good vintage image of a family by a weaving loom, and although the restoration work might not be very visible I actually spent about five days on that print. DurovaCharge! 20:34, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I've removed some requests for citations regarding material that is in fact referenced.  It is not necessary to have an inline citation for every sentence of a paragraph, when multiple successive statements are verified through the same source cited at the end of the paragraph.  Nor is it customary to provide inline citations in the introduction for material that is adequately referenced in greater detail in the article body. DurovaCharge! 22:04, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS): 
The writing, as far as I can tell, is very good
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
Here's where the problem is. Even though not every sentence needs a reference, I like to see every paragraph end with a source. So, just put a ref where the "Citation necessary" tag is, and that should fix it.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
Amazing amount of information found for this
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars etc.: 

It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

Most everything is very good, but I really can't pass it with that citation necessary tag. All it needs is a reference there, and it will pass. Until then, I've put the article On-hold. Thank you for your hard work in improving this article, and good luck in improving it to GA status. Juliancolton The storm still blows... 14:03, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll work on that. DurovaCharge! 14:10, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Ok, good. And again, other than that on issue, this is a very good article. Juliancolton The storm still blows... 14:11, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
At this point the article is completely sourced. Geoff Plourde (talk) 18:06, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars etc.: 

It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

All of the issues have been addressed, and thus, it passes GA. Juliancolton The storm still blows... 00:16, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Those Navajo rug patterns are very similar to Turkish (especially Turkmen/Yoruk) rug/carpet patterns. (Täñritäg (talk) 12:32, 14 August 2008 (UTC))

That's due to the influence of traders in the late 19th century and 20th century who encouraged weavers to incorporate Turkish and Southwest Asia designs in their their rugs. -Uyvsdi (talk) 00:34, 28 April 2010 (UTC)Uyvsdi

Since this article discusses blankets, serapes, and mantas as well as rugs, Navajo weaving seems like a more accurate title. -Uyvsdi (talk) 00:34, 28 April 2010 (UTC)Uyvsdi

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Navajo weaving. 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/20090123144029/http://www.ansi.okstate.edu/breeds/sheep/navajochurro/index.htm to http://www.ansi.okstate.edu/breeds/sheep/navajochurro/index.htm
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) 22:12, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Navajo weaving. 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/20070929034846/http://www.gonavajo.com/navajoart/about.asp?s_id=0&undefined to http://www.gonavajo.com/navajoart/about.asp?s_id=0&undefined
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) 20:04, 14 February 2018 (UTC)