Talk:Necktie/Archive 1

message: This is the archive page; feel free to add to it
-----
Hello.   I noticed that this page wasn't there, and therefore created it.
    -FB (frank@hero.artos.com)
----
   Father's gift.  Hysterical.  Keep up the good work, guys and girls.
   -FB
----
Thanks for the wikipedia-ization, people.
  -FB
----
This article is a little too definitive for my tastes: what is the source for this material? The closest I can find is this: http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a2_155.html
...which says nothing about a Croatian mercenary coming to the court of England, only that "In the 17th century, Louis XIV's Croatian regiment also wore neck cloths, whence we derive our word "cravat," from the French cravate, for "Croatian." ". Unless anyone objects within 7 days, I'll modify this accordingly. - David Stewart 03:48, 18 Aug 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: Doesn't sound like a change that needs a week-long waiting period. Go for it now<G>. -- Someone else 03:57, 18 Aug 2003 (UTC)
replies: text:  I actually wanted to wait and hear from the author of the article. Its an interesting statement and if it has a valid source then I'd like to know about it. I'm not entirely happy about changing it until we hear from him. 7 days should be enough time. - David Stewart 04:04, 18 Aug 2003 (UTC)

text: I think that is very clear if you look at the 2nd half of Claus von Amsberg. - Patrick 05:43, 17 Sep 2003 (UTC)

text: Wow.   Reminds me of that joke about "Which sex is smarter?   Obviously the women, the men start each day by tying a rope around their neck."
----
Excellent work with the links.  :)
 
  -FB
== True or false?? ==
True or false: it has become common recently for women to wear neck ties. 66.245.8.15 01:05, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

text: I wouldn't say "common," but I also wouldn't say it's highly unusual.  I have seen some women wearing neckties, and a few have contacted or thanked me for advice (because they found The Necktie Repository), but guessing, I'd say 1% of my mail is related to a woman wearing a tie. -- ke4roh 01:37, Aug 31, 2004 (UTC)
== Links to non-English sites ==
I can find nothing in Wikipedia guidelines that rules out external links to sites in non-English languages (perhaps I've missed it — there's a lot of material to wade through).  Nor do I understand the objection to such links, so long as the fact that they're in French, for example, is clearly stated.  Many users of the Encyclopædia read more than one language, and if there's a useful resource in another language, what harm is there in making it available.  We're not shoving French ties down people's throats, just offering them the option. Mel Etitis  (Μελ Ετητης) 10:25, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

text: The external link in question http://perso.wanadoo.fr/jf.gateau/linguist/linguist.htm doesn't appear to be in any way useful to this article. What exactly does it give us that is not already contained either in the article or in the other external links? Jooler 20:25, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Aside from anything else, it gives another source for theories about the origins of the tie, plus relevant terms in various languages.  What I don't understand is why you (and another) are so set against it. Is your claim that all the other external links provide something unique?  The four sites on how to tie a tie (including the one that you've just added)? Mel Etitis  (Μελ Ετητης) 21:33, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: My main problem is that I can't read French so it is of absolutely no use to me whatsoever, it might as well be in Chinese. Why not try to find and English language alternative, or better still put the alternate explanation given in this site in the Wikipedia article. The link that I've added it not about how to tie a tie, it is an abstract about the mathematical modelling that was used by the two Cambridge researchers in order to enumerate all of the possible ways in which a tie can be tied, that formed the basis of their book "85 ways to tie a tie". This is certainly unique. As for the others if they are all the same or very similar then I agree they should be culled, I haven't bothered to check. Jooler 22:56, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

text: Mel Etitis is dead right here! There are no reasons to forbid information that is available in a familiar foreign language, which supplements information in other references, and which may even provide the source that Wikipedians are being invited to cite. --Wetman 09:12, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

text: Well well, no sooner do I have an argument with you on one article, but you pop up on an article listed on my User page with a challenge to my contribution.  Interesting coincidence.  The references are in the External links section.  Was there some reason that you challenged just the section that I added, or can you see references included in the text of the other sections which are invisible to me? Mel Etitis  (Μελ Ετητης) 12:13, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

text: No challenge intended. Mel Etitis hasn't read my contributions at Cravat, apparently, made before he began at Wikipedia. I have no problem with original research, when it is so well presented. --Wetman 19:30, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Archive 1

message: I can find nothing in Wikipedia guidelines that rules out external links to sites in non-English languages (perhaps I've missed it — there's a lot of material to wade through).  Nor do I understand the objection to such links, so long as the fact that they're in French, for example, is clearly stated.  Many users of the Encyclopædia read more than one language, and if there's a useful resource in another language, what harm is there in making it available.  We're not shoving French ties down people's throats, just offering them the option. Mel Etitis  (Μελ Ετητης) 10:25, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The external link in question http://perso.wanadoo.fr/jf.gateau/linguist/linguist.htm doesn't appear to be in any way useful to this article. What exactly does it give us that is not already contained either in the article or in the other external links? Jooler 20:25, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Aside from anything else, it gives another source for theories about the origins of the tie, plus relevant terms in various languages.  What I don't understand is why you (and another) are so set against it. Is your claim that all the other external links provide something unique?  The four sites on how to tie a tie (including the one that you've just added)? Mel Etitis  (Μελ Ετητης) 21:33, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: My main problem is that I can't read French so it is of absolutely no use to me whatsoever, it might as well be in Chinese. Why not try to find and English language alternative, or better still put the alternate explanation given in this site in the Wikipedia article. The link that I've added it not about how to tie a tie, it is an abstract about the mathematical modelling that was used by the two Cambridge researchers in order to enumerate all of the possible ways in which a tie can be tied, that formed the basis of their book "85 ways to tie a tie". This is certainly unique. As for the others if they are all the same or very similar then I agree they should be culled, I haven't bothered to check. Jooler 22:56, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

text: Mel Etitis is dead right here! There are no reasons to forbid information that is available in a familiar foreign language, which supplements information in other references, and which may even provide the source that Wikipedians are being invited to cite. --Wetman 09:12, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links to non-English sites 

message: Are there any references here, or is this all original reasearch? --Wetman 11:51, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well well, no sooner do I have an argument with you on one article, but you pop up on an article listed on my User page with a challenge to my contribution.  Interesting coincidence.  The references are in the External links section.  Was there some reason that you challenged just the section that I added, or can you see references included in the text of the other sections which are invisible to me? Mel Etitis  (Μελ Ετητης) 12:13, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

text: No challenge intended. Mel Etitis hasn't read my contributions at Cravat, apparently, made before he began at Wikipedia. I have no problem with original research, when it is so well presented. --Wetman 19:30, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Ties as signs of membership

message: This page makes no mention at all of tie use by youths or females, yet does not clearly state that it only covers use by adult men. I know that females have been know to wear ties, if only in the punk scene (Avril Lavigne was wearing them at her concerts.) and any boy old enough to walk is dressed in a little suit complete with tie for formal occasions (in America). Could this page mention these issues?
IsaacSapphire (talk) 22:12, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If the article makes no reference to adult men, why would you need to specify women and boys? Also, Avril Lavigne is pop, not punk. 2crudedudes (talk) 14:32, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Women and Boys 

message: What is the opinion of the general populace on replacing the word derivation for cravat from the word "Croats" to Hrvatska, the Croatian word for Croatia?  I believe I'm right in saying this is where the word comes from, not the anglicized name for the country.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prostudioetlabore (talk • contribs) 19:12, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Croats v. Hrvatska 

message: I recommend that the Clip-On ties section should have a page of its own, as i can put a link to it on here and include some pictures of them on its own individual page, and go into great detail about them, If you dont argee please tell me on here or on my talk page, User:Dep. Garcia    Thanks
Dep. Garcia 10:10, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Suppose, but what about a picture? Dep. Garcia 10:28, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think a picture or diagram would be valuable, particularly if it showed how the clip affixes the tie.  ENeville 18:54, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I see you've got one in Clip-on tie.  I think that's a good one.  ENeville 23:58, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It shows the clip used to fasten to the shirt, ENeville what do you think of the article Clip-on ties that I made?? Dep. Garcia 17:46, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clip-On Tie 

message: Hi all.  It was suggested above that we cull some of the links about how to tie a tie.  As a precursor to this, I have:
# Categorised all external references
# Put the numerous "How to tie a tie" links in a table, with some information for comparison purposes
Many of the other external links also cover how to tie a tie, but that's not why we have them, so I haven't put them in the table.  
There's a link that's entirely in Russian, which was added by an IP address (presumably someone with no Wikipedia account).  Unless someone can give me a good reason why it should stay here, I'll get rid of it.  
What I think we want to achieve is:
* Explain how to tie the knots in as useful a fashion as possible
* Explain as many different knots as possible
For this reason, I'd expect that we'd keep all the ones with entries in the "Other Knots" column.  
I also need to go through sometime and rate each page for ease-of-use (easy, medium, hard), and then we'll see how we go.
TimNelson
:Wow, lots of work there.  Well done. - PKM 17:13, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Culling how-to links 

message: Ok, all categorised by how good the instructions are.  The Russian link is gone.  Unless someone complains, I'll get rid of the last two links in the table, as they don't have anything that the others don't, AFAICT.  TimNelson 03:00, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Part II

message: I apologize if presumptuous or unschooled in posting standards on this issue, but the instructions in these links are extremely poor.  I've taken the trouble to go through the Fink-Mao link fairly thoroughly and have a pretty good understanding of necktie knotting at this point, and I still have difficulty following many of the directions linked here because they are so often confusing.  The "cross" knot directions seem to arbritrarily reverse right & left of the conceptual model compared to the other instructions on that site, and many of the directions on the site credited with the most knots appear to be simply redundant, e.g. "simple" and "Italian" or "English" and "Windsor".  Additionally, I believe that some of the instructions are erroneous, depending on one's standards.  I would hate to be trying to learn how to tie a tie from one of these sites.
BTW, I've looked at a few other sites on the web, which often have fetching photos or diagrams, but have regularly found distinct errors in instruction.  I think good references are hard to find on this subject. ENeville 18:52, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Further

message: Only verifiably used knots should be included in the article, based on WP:V.  By extension, external links that explain tying unverified knots should be culled, particularly if commercial.  This may me be a little harsh for culturally variable issues like clothing knots, but seems necessary when commercial sites are evidently padding their knot instructions for sake of attention. ENeville 18:27, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Verifiable knots

message: Currently, "External links" has subcategories for history, care, etc.  There's so much crossover in the types of pages linked, however, that links keep getting multiply listed.  I think this section should be reorganized more conventionally, with a list of links followed by one-line descriptions.  Also, with knot-tying methods being deprecated by redundancy in individual articles (eg Windsor knot), as well as the impinging argument that they verge on howto's (WP:NOT), external links included just for their tying methods are arguably misplaced in this article. ENeville 18:52, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: External links organization

message: Saw no mention of these here; are they in a different category of neckwear.  I don't think they're the same origin, and maybe were frontier-origin only; maybe an adaption of the velvet-ribbon-tie using cord instead, with a clasp to hold it together?Skookum1 00:19, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Right there under Necktie#Tie variants.  It was labeled as Bola tie (it's real name), and string tie was at the end of its description in regularly formatted text, so i can see why it'd be easy to miss.  I changed it so now it reads Bola tie (also called a string tie); a varation blah blah blah blah. --jfg284 you were saying? 11:47, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: String ties

message: what about those ties you see in westerns?  i love those, what are they called? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RevSavitar (talk • contribs).
:Bola tie (sometimes, "shoestring necktie").
:Atlant 14:20, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  COWBOY TIES???`