Talk:White tie

message: (April 1, 2011: the following comment incorrectly appeared at the top of this page and was not placed in any context so I moved it here and made up a heading Peter Marshall (talk) 17:58, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misc. 

message: ironically due to the cultural marxism of the 60s dumbing everything down & destroying established precedent we now have a more restrictive, elitizing, of the white tie - when in fact not a one has referred to any time tested ettiquette series or authorities - in short a white tie can be worn anytime the event is deemed formal (meaning at a minimum black tie must be worn to be formal which can always be upgraded to white tie) as opposed to business wear (suits) or casual - also women do not have to wear a ball gown w/ a white tie, another post 60s revsionism probably done by another characterless empty ego making a name for oneself - refer to emily post - also the diplomatic, royal court world is not the origin of ettiquette that dear friends resides w/ time tested honorable upper class culture - in other words whatever the established aristocracy is out of which by the way the sovereign comes from - stop defering to idiotic formal events that have a purpose ie political/work related when in fact true formal events need not serve a work related purpose - to link the two is utterly lumpen hoi poloi illiterati petite bourgoise
A significant drawback of a “public” or “open” encyclopedia like Wikipedia is that there is no editor to ensure consistency among related articles.  The articles regarding formal wear are a case in point with different authors using different terms to mean the same thing and vice versa. I propose that all formal wear terminology be consolidated in a single location and that related articles use this terminology consistently.  The most logical place to establish this terminology would be the page describing dress codes (Social aspects of clothing) but it has (rightly) been tagged for a number of deficiencies.  Therefore the next obvious choice seems to the Formal wear page.
I have taken the liberty of beginning to establish universal terminology on the aforementioned page.  I have subsequently made corresponding changes in this page, including placing a request to rename the page.  Details for this change of terminology can be found on the Formal wear page.   Should anyone have any objections to the new terminology – or to the selection of the Formal wear page as the location for establishing this technology – please make your edits on the Formal wear page before making them here so that the consolidation will be enhanced rather than sidetracked. Peter Marshall 02:31, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consolidation of Wikipedia formal wear terminology 

message: This article is about "white tie" which is not the same thing as "evening dress" ----
:Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~
===Discussion===
:This request is a result of an attempt to consolidate formal wear terminology throughout Wikipedia.  Please see the discussion page for Formal wear for my entry entitled "Consolidation of Wikipedia formal wear terms" for more information. Peter Marshall 02:47, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Somebody wanted references, so here is one: Lucire, the glbal fashion magazine. Full evening dress is White tie, evening dress may mean black tie. --Bob 21:24, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

text: *Not quite there; your proposal still suggests that US usage is "correct".  Perhaps this will work if "Evening Dress" clearly lays out the difference in terminology and the new "White tie" article states something like "known as Full Evening Dress in the UK" or whatever the correct term is.  Also, we're going to cause confusion with "Formal Wear" and "Evening Dress" unless we decide which article is the main one describing all the variations considered formal wear.  The other articles should state, This article describes X, for an overview of formal wear see XY  Quill
===Result===
User:Ugen64 moved the page. WhiteNight T | @ | C 17:42, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move

message: User:Ugen64 moved the page. WhiteNight T | @ | C 17:42, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Result

message: Just an addition to the above, I don't know if this should be in the article or not. In Sweden, where white-tie is relatively common, as the article notes, it is considered the most formal dress. However, it isn't the only such dress. Traditional attire (Folkdräkt) is considered on-par with white-tie, and is accepted as a substitute on most occasions requiring white-tie. The same goes for full military dress uniform. --BluePlatypus 20:15, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Formality status in Sweden 

message: When, exactly, is "evening dress" used as a synonym for "morning dress"?  That seems like a bizarre claim to make.  My understanding was that "evening dress" is used for either black tie or white tie. john k 14:41, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Never, not even in this article. It doesn't say "synonymous", it says "equivalent". What's equivalent isn't the dress, it's the formality of the occasion. The time of day determines the dress, the occasion determines the formality. 68.122.2.212 02:42, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Evening dress=Morning dress?? 

message: We need a better photograph. The man on the right isn't following the rules of white tie: he is wearing a fold-down collar, rather than a wing collar; his trousers appear to have only one strip of braid (and he obviously isn't wearing braces/suspenders). No wonder Prince Philip is looking at him in disgust...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.251.192.96 (talk) 12:20, August 30, 2007 (UTC) 
:And his waistcoat extends below the bottom of the tailcoat front...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.251.192.96 (talk) 10:04, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  A hi-res photo of President Ford wearing white tie is available courtesy the Ford Presidential Library; although it is also in the public domain, it's not a full-body shot as is the current photo. Perhaps a well-dressed editor would be willing to pose for a few candid shots? drseudo (t) 09:00, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Found a better one of President Kennedy and stuck it in. WP:BOLD and all that. drseudo (t) 09:17, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photograph 

message: My impression is that this article only covers male clothing, but it doesn't explicitly state that.  What are the female guidelines for white-tie dress?  Thanks, -- Creidieki 00:52, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Backpack with evening wear? There was stated: "Women wear a full-length evening dress, with the option of jewellery, a tiara, a pashmina, coat or wrap, and backpack." Just in case I deleted backpack; if that has some other meaning, suitable for evening wear, I beg your pardon - and some explanation on the evening wear backpack. Guessed it was some joke...BirgittaMTh (talk) 17:08, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: It's really a male dress code. Women have a lot more freedom, at least theoretically. They're just expected to turn up in a below the knee posh frock and heels. These aren't events to go to in your leggings and trainers. --Ef80 (talk) 18:01, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Female guidelines 

message: I've removed "graduation ceremonies at some universities" from the list of occasions: although a white bow tie forms part of academic dress at many universities, academic dress is not "White Tie". Rather, the white tie is worn with a dark lounge suit.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by KarenSutherland (talk • contribs) 19:46, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  White tie at university graduations? 

message: I think we may have just seen a permanent change in Men's dress codes tonight.  At the Inaugural Balls, President Obama upstaged his wife by daringly wearing a white-tie with his dinner jacket.  Inaugural Balls are typically white-tie and Obama's decision to wear a tuxedo (a bad one, sadly) instead was reported as a signal of frugality in the economic crisis.  But then he wore a white-tie with it!  This may be a situation like the creation of the dinner jacket by the Edward VII (while Prince of Wales) or the adoption of the soft collar and authorization of midnight blue by his son the Duke of Windsor (when he, in turn, was Prince of Wales).  In each case - as in most changes to the male dress code through the years - they used their status at the very apex of the social pyramid as license to change the rules.  I wonder if we have not just seem the same thing from the new phenomenon/President - the final banishing of the tailcoat and the adoption of the dinner jacket for white-tie. TheCormac (talk) 03:36, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: And about time. I'm tired of seeing concert pianists flip their coat tails over the piano bench. After Obama, they won't have to. SBHarris 04:51, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe, but the point was made to me this morning by formal wear expert Peter Marshall that, since the event was announced as black-tie rather than white, Obama was really challenging the black-tie ensemble rather than the white-tie outfit.  (Which he would have done, presumably, by holding the events white-tie and then arriving in a dinner jacket while the others were in tails.) TheCormac (talk) 18:37, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't considerably too much being read into this? If Obama wears everything black tie except for the tie, which is white, he is still in "black tie". Plenty of people at black tie events actually wear red bow ties, or blue bow ties, or whatever else they feel like. This may be less usual at a presidential event, but it's hardly revolutionary. Westmorlandia (talk) 17:36, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, the two Princes of Wales mentioned above were style arbiters and leaders of fashion. Barack Obama is not. Opera hat (talk) 18:09, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: A Change?

message: Is there a better picture of white tie attire than George W. Bush making an ass of himself by having his shirt hanging from under his coat?  My cat's breath smells like catfood (talk) 01:28, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Picture

message: The article says that White Tie is seen at Presidential Inaugural Balls.  But the last time White Tie was worn at an inaugural ball was 30 years ago.  In theory it could be revived by any new President, but I wonder if an event that has been black tie for that many years really should be cited in as a White Tie event in this article.  It seems to me more akin to the Academy Awards, which are mentioned in the article as having once been White Tie, but now being Black Tie.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.224.13.116 (talk) 00:41, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Presidential Inaugurals?

message: What's the difference between a white tie outfit worn in the winter as opposed to a white tie outfit worn in the summer? Are there any extra accessories added on in the winter or is it just the weight of the fabric? GVnayR (talk) 14:06, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The difference in seasons 

message: This article contains no information on the origin of 'white tie' dress. This is why I came to the page and I would really appreciate it if someone could add this information. Tibetologist (talk) 09:19, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Origin of the dress

message: In the section "Men's Clothes", it states "White low-cut waistcoat (usually cotton marcella (US: piqué), matching the bow tie and shirt, which should not extend below the front of the tailcoat."  This is not precisely true. Evening dress ("white tie") can be traced directly back to just after the turn of the 19th century when wearing a cutaway frock coat over a waistcoat was popularized (albeit the double-breasted coat being held closed with buttons). It was always worn with an inch or more of the hem of the waistcoat extending below the front of the coat's cutaway. By about 1870, what we now think of as "white tie" was formally fixed, with the waistcoat still appearing below the bottom of the front of the coat, and it remained that way until at least 1910. It began to disappear in the US soon thereafter, mostly because it was believed to give a more flattering silhouette; Fred Astaire and other performers wore them this way in films, where lengthening the silhouette was essential.  The rest of the world followed suit -- to a degree. However, it is still common amongst the European aristocracy to have the points of the waistcoat hem extend 1/2" to 3/4" below the points of the coat. Given that full evening dress is the oldest and most conservative costume still worn by men, it is not inappropriate to wear it as it was worn a century or more ago. I think that the statement should be modified to reflect this divergence of opinions. Bricology (talk) 11:21, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The correct length of the waistcoat 

message: The article had clearly collected a lot of disparate and redundant/repetitive info over time as people added a sentence here or there.  I tried my best to streamline it.
Summary/Intro
*this section is supposed to give a top-line overview of the topic e.g. what it is, where, when and why it's worn; therefore I removed all sorts of redundant and arcane info (e.g. use of white tie in pre-revolutionary Iran, details of semi-formal daywear)
*qualified the summary of where it's worn to make it clear that it is highly ceremonial and extremely formal (previously it was implying it was worn regularly to the opera and banquets which is hardly the case)
*changed definition of evening to 6 PM or dark (was 5 PM or dark) and provided reference
*removed vague comment on origin of the tailcoat as it's discussed in detail in the Wikipedia "Tailcoat" article
Elements
*used "dress coat" as the primary term for the tailcoat for consistency with the rest of this article and with the Wikipedia "Tailcoat" articles
*added option of midnight blue for coat and trousers
Appropriate Occasions
*clearly grouped this section by geographic region
*changed reference to white tie being worn at US presidential inaugural balls to note that this no longer happens (as mentioned elsewhere in this Discussion forum) - it has not been worn since Reagan's first election in 1981
*removed biased and unnecessary comment about tailcoat being a cliche for performers of classical music
Peter Marshall (talk) 17:23, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Major Changes to / clean-up of article

message: I think the "formal" / "semi-formal" terminology should either be used in context or avoided altogether as there is no universal consensus of their meanings.  Back in the 1930s white tie was commonly considered "formal" and black tie "semi-formal" but ever since WW2 different people have been interpreting the terms in different ways.  (For proof see Emily Post Etiquette 1955 edition where she specifically addresses this confusion and allows for two sets of interpretations.)  In fact, very few members of the public use the 1930s definition any more.  If the average person is invited to a "formal" dinner he is most certainly not going to expect to wear white tie.   For many communities (at least in North America), "formal" can mean no more than a suit and tie.  (I'm amazed at how many university-educated, worldly professionals I have talked to who have never even heard of the concept of white tie.)  Therefore, it would avoid ambiguity to say that in this day and age white tie is the "most formal" dress code and black tie is the "second most formal".  (If I knew how to edit the "Western Dress Codes" side bar to reflect this, I would!)
Peter Marshall (talk) 17:52, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Dress code terminology: Formal vs Semi-formal

message: Might the photograph and caption of 'Mustafa Kemal Atatürk' [sic'] be removed as soon as possible? The image of a perpetrator of what we now define as war crimes and crimes against humanity (Smyrna, 1922, for example) surely isn't appropriate for a fashion page. Moreover, to refer to Mustafa Kemal as 'Atatürk, Founder of Modern Turkey', with that honorific and capitalization, as opposed to a more neutral 'first president of the Turkish Republic', is tendentious in this context. I would heartily recommend replacing the photograph with an image of a less controversial person.R.dulgarian (talk) 16:46, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Photograph of controversial figure in white tie with black waistcoat

message: This paragraph doesn't seem to include different forms of clergy and isn't clear on which clergy it does talk about. Is the author talking about Catholic clergy? Orthodox? I feel like I need to edit to make this more clear but am only like 70% sure this section refrences Catholic clergy.
I know my Rabbi wears the same formal clothing everyone else is wearing, with an appropriate kippah. Does anybody have info on what clergy of other faiths do?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caffeinated42 (talk • contribs) 05:03, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clergy Clarification  

message: At least in Europe, the standard for waiters in high-rank restaurants (and cafés) is or was tailcoat with black vest and black tie. Now is that "black tie" or "white tie"? -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by MegA (talk • contribs) 13:49, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I understand, it is the waiter's uniform. As no gentleman ever wears a black tie with a tailcoat, it really does not fall into either category. On the other hand, a white tie with a black waistcoat was, at least in historical Finnish and, I suppose, imperial German and Russian etiquette, the civilian equivalent of service uniform. Thus, it is still worn thus in the Finnish academic celebrations that are held during the day, and it may be worn in the night if no women (or, actually, no women without a doctoral degree) are present. --MPorciusCato (talk) 19:12, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Waiters? 

message: I have just rewritten much of this article. A substantial amount of the pre-existing material was unsourced or poorly sourced and often overly detailed. There was also a lot of repetition (eg two bullet-point descriptions of the dress code, plus a lengthy OR-ish breakdown of each element) and an awful lot of lists where prose would do just fine. I hope I haven't offended anyone with these changes. Sections like "national dress" probably need to be elsewhere as this article is about white tie, although I have mentioned that it is appropriate for national dress to be worn at many white tie events nowadays; the description of the Scottish dress is, as the article says, not a description of white tie, so it probably ought to be in an article called something like "Scottish evening dress" or "Scottish formal wear". Regards, —Noswall59 (talk) 18:31, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It's actually called Highland dress. With the white jabot, it may be worn as black-tie or white-tie. With the black tie, of course, it may only be worn as black-tie. Khamba Tendal (talk) 18:44, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overhaul 

message: In the gallery pics, about 50% of of the photos feature men wearing sashes, but there's no mention of this in the article, and the lede doesn't mention it as an acceptable accessory? 128.189.160.99 (talk) 00:31, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Those are part of a Diplomatic uniform - the people in those photos are diplomats or heads of state attending events in an official capacity. MrOllie (talk) 00:35, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  No mention of sash?