Talk:History of fashion design

message: We should consider re-wording the references to Jacques Fath and Maggy Rouff in the section for the 1940s, or remove them from the list of new houses that opened up during WWII, I believe. Both houses pre-date WWII, Fath's house opening in 1937 and Rouff's in 1928. Perhaps the reference to this era could be extended to explain they they were among those few to remain open during the entirety of Nazi occupation and Vichy control, however? Kpants 05:40, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: :Image:Biba q.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 01:28, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Biba q.jpg

message: Anybody can reconnect or do something external link number 2 
Best --Asiri wiki (talk) 05:48, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: External link is broken 

message: hisgebgwjyfakCYECVKRUYAGRLCIAWERKYCFHEJJKiuyvuir. 
ywgtvbkuatwyvriuaw4crkyulltkr.
htgbvwtgqkut!
vtcyuatwkutvwuybgktugkbvuy? 
U?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.229.226.77 (talk) 22:25, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Who can argue with that??? Tors newton (talk) 00:40, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  pioneer clothing  

message: This book seems to have a lot of the same text as this article.  Curious that the book came out in 2007 and this article dates back further than that... - PKM (talk) 23:08, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Goodness me. I'd say "copy and pasted" rather than "have a lot of the same text", after doing a side by side comparison - I barely found any differences between the Wikipedia text and the book, even going by older pre-book versions of the article. That's really quite shocking...! Mabalu (talk) 14:05, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a most important issue. The text has virtually no in-line citations and is apparently largely copy-vio. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:10, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Even though the book itself post-dates the text in the article, so the book seems to be copy-vio-ing Wikipedia rather than the other way round. Still - a bit of a mess, really. Mabalu (talk) 14:37, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: This is one of many books that simply repeat Wikipedia articles, which they are able to do if the attribute the source correctly. Johnbod (talk) 12:52, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Curious

message: Image below 1900s is definitely not what it should be. 129.2.129.232 (talk) 06:36, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Please Fix!

message: My reasons for demoting the article are:
#It has almost no in-line citations, and
#It is claimed to be largely a copy-violation, on what seem to be good grounds, and
#It is too limited in scope: starts too late in time, and is perhaps Euro-centered to a fault. There is, of course, a case for concentrating on the western European fashion design, but the article assumes it rather than argues it.
#These issues have been raised on the talk page by other editors, whose points have been ignored. 
These are multiple issues which need attention. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:19, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not a copy-vio, at least from the book mentioned in the section above, which simply reprints Wikipedia articles, a popular online rip-off, especially in India. As for the scope - the article needs a rename, see below. Johnbod (talk) 12:55, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Demotion of article 

message: - or fashion design. As many have said above, this is the actual subject, & the name should reflect this. History of fashion design should be a disam type page with links to a wider range of articles by period and global cultures. Johnbod (talk) 12:58, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Also I'd point out that technically, Worth started business in the mid-19th century so considering that, the article should probably be "History of Western fashion since 1850" (and to further baffle and confound, Rose Bertin has a stronger claim to be the first truly famous fashion designer to enjoy name recognition (and she was late 18th century!)) Mabalu (talk) 13:45, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree Japanese designers at least should be covered; since many are well integrated into what is now a globalized high-end industry I think the proposed name just about covers them. At the moment the article only mentions Worth very briefly by way of introduction, and no other 19th century designers. The scope could easily be pushed back by some decades, & if this was done a further rename to History of Western fashion since 1850 would be appropriate.  The disam-type page should cover whatever sets of articles we have - at the moment the "by period" sequence is clearly the flagship. Johnbod (talk) 13:52, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

text:  Comment - This is actually a pretty good point. I'd say that much of what people wore is/was influenced by the designers, particularly from the late 19th century onwards, although most (if not all) of the "Fashion of the (period)" articles seem to discuss what people wore, more so than designers. Mabalu (talk) 01:53, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

text: Not really (odd one out, I mean). The current article is a bit of both, & pretty superficial, with no real coverage of the fashion industry as an industry. I just don't want History of fashion redirecting here, as it currently does. Nor do I have any intention of rewriting it. Johnbod (talk) 02:24, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Tell truth, neither do I - can't face the magnitude of the task, truth be told, much as I know how desperately it needs it. Mabalu (talk) 02:52, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename to [[History of Western fashion since 1900]] 

message: Substituted at 18:02, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: The introduction area of the page seems quite long and that the history part of Worth could be its own subsection. It could be worth it to do a Pre-Worth section to briefly talk about the distinction between the consumer driven seamstress fashion and designer driven fashion, it may help to distinguish the history of fashion and fashion design.  If anyone has any suggestions on how to do this or references to look at I would greatly appreciate it. --Knl413 (talk) 01:05, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction Area and Worth 

message: This article only covers history of fashion up until 1990s. There needs to be new information on fashion since this time. New sources should be found to cover the 2000s and 2010s. This article is also mainly about western fashion design and I agree that it should be renamed to "History of Western Fashion since 1900." The introduction could also be more to the point and keep the main details of each period of time in the sub sections. Paigedevans (talk) 14:52, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not up to date