Talk:Tuxedo

message: While that's a fine picture of Mulroney, Reagan, and their wives, it's not a good picture of a tuxedo.  If you have one available, please add it to this article.--Munkel (talk) 04:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Better picture 

message: This is a bit ridiculous. Most of the material here is duplicated. This is a miniature article, and 'dinner jacket' (the BrE term for the same thing) already redirects there.  If no-one objects within the next couple of pages, I will do it.—Kan8eDie (talk) 01:39, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is clearly distinct from the dress code; considering it had a referenced history that was never included on the black tie page, I don't know why it was redirected in the first place. I re-combined the lost information and code with the admirable work of User:Peter Marshall. -Kez (talk) 21:10, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger Proposal

message: As per discussions on the Black Tie page, tuxedo should have not redirected to Black Tie as it deserves its own history and description.  I have therefore removed the tuxedo-specific information from the Black Tie page, moved it here and added a basic history.  I also redirected Dinner Jacket here.Peter Marshall (talk) 12:34, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: "un-merge": the garment is quite distinct from the dress code

message: I should suggest to merge both articles, placing the tuxedo in the black tie under its specific subtitle in the section dedicated to history of the black tie. Adding maybe that the black tie is sometimes called smoking (v. Pseudo-anglicism). Inoslav Bešker (talk) 14:13, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is clearly distinct from the dress code; considering it had a referenced history that was never included on the black tie page, I don't know why it was redirected in the first place. I re-combined the lost information and code with the admirable work of User:Peter Marshall. -Kez (talk) 21:10, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: As has already been said, tuxedo is a garment.  Black tie is a dress code.  Tuxedos can be worn to non-black tie events. They originated as a casual garment back when dressing impractically was the key to success, history which is and should be covered here.  And I'm pretty sure that you could wear a tailcoat to a black tie event. I vaguely recall a certain conservative columnist bemoaning the fact that people don't do that anymore.  --Quintucket (talk) 15:43, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Oppose Merger

message: The Etymology section says nothing about etymology. Just sayin'.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.2.25.124 (talk) 18:01, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology 

message: This article specifies that a tuxedo is worn "for a semi-formal evening occasion."  Semi-formal?  Should this not instead say "for a formal evening occasion."
Nabelekt (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 03:10, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. Especially since the last paragraph of the article says that a tuxedo is most commonly worn at formal weddings, formal proms, and formal nights on dinner cruises. [emphasis mine] I will correct this. In North America, at least, I have no idea what kind of clothing for a man would be more formal than a texedo. Primium mobile (talk) 12:07, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I'm going to look into this a little more. It is unclear whether the definition is referring to the entire outfit or just the jacket. I'm going to find a better source. The Random House entry for "tuxedo" that is used for the definition makes no reference to anything other than the jacket, but the lede to the article states that the entire outfit is referred to as a tuxedo. Primium mobile (talk) 12:14, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Back when white tie was more common (say pre-1960), white tie was "formal" and black tie was "semi-formal". Today, I think there is a strong argument to call black tie "formal" and white tie "ultra-formal". Indefatigable (talk) 14:50, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-formal? 

message: I have overhauled the article to give it a consistent tone throughout, add newly discovered facts, provide extensive citations and clearly delineate between this article and the closely related Black Tie article.  During the process I have deleted the following:
* reference to the Prince of Wales having ordered a dinner jacket from Henry Poole in 1885.  This claim lacked a source and has been refuted by Henry Poole & Co. who informed me that the Prince was no longer a customer of their firm by 1880.
* specific French names for the shawl collar and peaked lapel versions of the dinner jacket.  This information is irrelevant for an English language article – its inclusion would justify the addition of foreign-language terminology for all other aspects of the garment.  
* reference to the notched lapel making a comeback in the 1960s.  The fact is that the notched lapel DJ was only rarely seen prior to this time. 
* reference to the notch lapel and long tie being disdained by traditionalists today.  Let’s just stick to the big picture which is the significant popularity of these styles.  If others feel it’s important to discuss the opinion of a minority of people (I include myself among the traditionalists) it would be best to present that under a separate heading so we can separate fact from commentary.
The fact that most of the citations refer to my web site and blog is not done out of vanity but of practicality.  When I refer to a fact that only has one source (e.g. the first written appearance of a formalwear term) I state that sole source.  However, if I make a more general claim (e.g. formalwear style trends in a given time period) I refer to the web page (or blog post) that summarizes the extensive research behind this claim and often provides sample quotations and/or illustrations to back it up. I certainly don't expect readers to simply take my word for it.
I hope others agree that the article’s integrity has been significantly improved by these changes. 
Peter Marshall (talk) 21:17, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent work, sir! I'd tip my hat but I don't wear one. oknazevad (talk) 04:32, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Complete Overhaul (November 2013)

message: Proposing Le Smoking to be merged with Tuxedo. Interqwark talk contribs 13:38, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal — 6 June 2018 

message: Proposed at Talk:Black tie. Chicbyaccident (talk) 17:05, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with [[black tie]]?