Talk:Aglet

message: I added some knowledge about when the aglet was first introduced and what its contents were made from or contained. But the reference I tried to add was not valid on this website because it was blacklisted but it is fine. No worries.  Flirteebby (talk) 00:33, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Etymology

message: *aglet - orphan that can never be more than a dictionary definition, better redirected to Wiktionary.  Daniel Quinlan 08:12, Nov 24, 2003 (UTC)
**Agree. Anjouli 08:19, 24 Nov 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  from VfD 

message: It is as unacceptable here as it is everywhere else. Simple mentioning aglets doesn't warrant inclusion in this article, and its importance cannot be implied without a secondary source. --Eyrian 15:03, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No. That sentence is discussing a particular sort of aglet that was common in the past, and mentions how this was referred to in Shakespeare, giving a name to the phenomenon. --Eyrian 17:11, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Neither reference is acceptable. I'll go take a look at the one you're talking about. --Eyrian 17:11, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

text: I've just removed the "In popular culture" section. Apparently this isn't the first time. See WP:TRIVIA.  Delicious carbuncle (talk) 00:55, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trivia 

message: It was an improvement to remove the irrelevant trivia. I do think, however, that the reference to the movie Cocktail has encyclopedic value because the word "fluglebinder" has entered the common lexicon from this movie, and many people (myself included, until I did the research today) think it might be the standard word for an aiglet, a word I'd never heard before in my life. When it comes up in conversation, someone always says, "Is that a real word, or was it invented in Cocktail?" but nobody knows any other term for it. Anyway, I came to Wikipedia looking to find out if a "fluglebinder" was an aiglet, so I'd say it was relevant as encyclopedic information, and deserves a mention on this page.
So, I propose adding text similar to the following to the bottom of the main part of the entry:
:The word flugelbinder or fluglebinder was coined in the movie Cocktail to refer to aiglets. Since then, it has caught on and is now popularly used to refer to aiglets by those are unfamiliar with the standard term.
If the addition is accepted, then I also propose creating redirect links from "Flugelbinder" and "Fluglebinder" to this article. --Atkinson (talk) 11:16, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There was no objection, so I've made the changes myself.--Atkinson (talk) 10:08, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: And now it's gone. This is unencyclopaedic, trivial, and your addition was completely unreferenced. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 14:38, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  And once again, the word ‘encyclopaedic’ is used to mean the opposite of encyclopaedic. —Toby Bartels (talk) 08:48, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cocktail reference valid? 

message: Mention it - it even includes this song:  78.88.117.116 (talk) 11:57, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aglets in popular culture -> ''Tip of the Day - Phineas and Ferb'' episode 

message: Every week, a well-meaning visitor adds a reference to the Phineas & Ferb episode about aglets. These additions are just as quickly deleted as "trivia" by other well-meaning editors. Will this to and fro continue indefinitely? Is it worth adding a suitably worded entry just to stop the constant edit battle? Is there justification for adding such a reference anyway? After all, unlike other "trivia", this is a whole episode of a cartoon devoted not just to "aglets" but to the fact that the word "aglet" is largely unknown, probably because it is such a "trivial" object (and therefore commonly appears in trivia quizzes). Ian Fieggen (talk) 23:37, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Look, I watch Phineas and Ferb; I like Phineas and Ferb. But that doesn't mean that the show needs to be mentioned here. In the List of Phineas and Ferb episodes entry for the episode in question, the word aglet is quite properly linked to this article for the benefit of readers wanting more information about aglets. But adding a mention of the episode here does not provide readers with any useful information about aglets or about Phineas and Ferb. "I spotted a reference to X in poplar-culture artifact Y" is not, in general, encyclopedic content; in fact, I think I first looked at this article shortly after the episode aired because I knew that this would happen. Deor (talk) 02:50, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: And I looked at this article specifically because of that episode and my curiosity to find out more about the aglet and why it would be worth the time to make it a plot in a cartoon. IMHO, pop culture references are a part of any object's meaning and history, regardless of how trivial said object might be. After all, not only are there entire dictionaries dedicated to slang terms, much of which arise from "pop culture," but also find their way into "normal" dictionaries as well. Wikipedia is supposed to be an ever growing repository of knowledge on any and every conceivable subject known to man (and woman). Major inclusion of an object into cultural reference, be it "pop" or otherwise, is surely deserving of some kind of side note, especially when said reference is an influencing factor in a person's reason for desiring to gather more information about said object. The fact that P&F has had such an influence on enough people to be included in this debate, seems to me to make it enough of a factor to be included in a reference/trivia note. Hanok Odbrook 68.80.23.59 (talk) 15:31, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

text: how about if i mentioned and put a reference link about the impact that episode had on gen Z, teaching about the aglet, and how it is on the other hand uncommon for many older people to not know what an aglet is? Kikiwiki el Wikipedio (talk) 17:48, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: @Kikiwiki el Wikipedio Necropost, this talk post hasn't been active for a while, chances are no one's gonna respond Pineappman (talk | tribs) 17:14, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

text: A common joke? I don't get it. Article seems just fine as it is to me. Doctorhawkes (talk) 02:50, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

text: If it's genuinely a common joke, we'd just need a source remarking on that. We shouldn't pull together a few examples and announce that we, Wikipedia, declare jokes about the naming of aglets to be "common", though - that's original research. --McGeddon (talk) 16:13, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Constant addition of Phineas and Ferb episode 

message: In an attempt to create an offcially recognized day centered around aglets, it is being suggested from the blog casualwhatever.blogspot.com that people bring awareness to this invention.  It is suggested by the blog to alert people of aglets and the pending official day.  The day suggested is November 11th (11/11 to represent dangling shoelaces).  It is asked that on November 11th people wear shoelaces as bracelets with the aglets dangle.  The catchphrase being used ont he blog is "let them dangle".  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Overlordofplanetawesome (talk • contribs) 17:16, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bringing Awareness