Talk:Textile

message: Textile is also a kind of ReStructured_Text http://textism.com/tools/textile/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.128.140.251 (talk) 22:52, 21 October 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Another definition

message: I'm new to this so appologies for doubles etc.  And also for probably being in the wrong section.
That being said in ROMP Ltd I hold licence X0001 from the Soil Association in the UK for the production of Organic Leather and we are about to crack denim/cotton as well.
I would like to propose a definition of Organic Textiles for discussion and final submission to Ifoam.
An Organic textile is one where the husbandry of the Soil at Planting or Birth is Certified organic to the same Organic standard of the eventual product.  All processes in the farming section are to that same standard with full separation until the raw material is presented to the Textile production stages.  The raw material is then treated in a manufacturing system that is also Organically certified to the same standard and separate in all aspects until the textile is complete.  This includes all physical and all chemical stages especially dye-ing. And finally an organic textile should contain an element in the final price which rewards the original producer fairly so that the Organic movement as a whole and the organic farmer specifially is rewarded directly for their status
To product a finished organic article from that textile to the original organic standard requires a certified factory and designer brand, and retailer.
At the moment 99% of the Organic Textile that I see gives up after raw material and introduces non-organic materials during the dye phase.  They also promote cheap labour which appears to be counter productive to the imperative and pressing need to change.  Hence we see Organic Cotton T shirts sold as such but printed and dyed with increased levels of Chromium based dyes and manufactured in the same factories and at the same appalling labour rates as is the norm today.
Of couse I am totally biased hence the need to open up the debate but would be very interested in logical and well thoughtout positions on where we are in the cycle and what is trully in the best interests of the planet.
Greg 
The Romp Project — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gregsturmer (talk • contribs) 10:59, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Organic textiles. 

message: The expression "textile leather" is used increasingly. I have no idea what it means, supposedly a leather subtitute. I found no definition and also no systematic classification until now. If it is a special kind of fabric it  would also be interesting to learn more about its properties or making.
Peter Loster — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.146.180.50 (talk) 20:36, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I found this definition: Textile leather: 11% cotton, 2% Polyurethan, 87% PVC — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.61.203.99 (talk) 11:28, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  textile leather 

message: all the processes in the textiles arctical have there own page ..and it is easy to load a page and then follow the links ..if you will merge the pages then users like me who do not have a good borwsing speed will suffer, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elminster Aumar (talk • contribs) 19:00, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  about listiness 

message: A textile, such as a crocheted or knitted piece, is not cloth. Textile artists work with FIBER, not necessarily with cloth. Zora 14:06, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What about merging Cloth into Textile, then? Hajhouse 15:38, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cloth is a particularly important form of textile and deserves its own article. Zora 23:19, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I oppose as well. However both articles require a major cleanup and a clear separation of "responsibilities". In particular textile/cloth/fabric term usage must be clearly described. mikka (t) 23:00, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

text: No to merging period. The technical distinction is clear, why is something used to make cloths being confused with industrial textiles which make conveyor belts, automotive fan belts, tires, etc.? I'm section editing looking for something else, but cloth <-->clothing is distinct from things like composite armor for Abrahms tanks and the like. If I can be of help, someone drop a note. <B>Fra</B>nkB 03:32, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NO to merge 

message: I got rid of all but one link! All the rest were commercial, or dead, or so abstruse as not to be useful. A list of Italian textile names would be better off in an article on Renaissance clothing. Too limited for here. 
I'm constantly appalled by people's willingless to exploit WP for a possible financial gain. Zora 17:48, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links pruned 

message: Some months ago, a came across a definition for a textile, that was woven but non-perpendicular. It seemed as if it were describing something other than non-woven.
I have developed a new type of fabric with a new method of construction and was looking for the proper terminology to describe it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gillessaindon (talk • contribs) 00:02, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where did the non-perpendicular weave go? 

message: ===Textile (7 votes, stays until August 19)===
:Nominated July 29, 2006; needs at least 9 votes by August 19, 2006
; Support:
# Yvwv 19:09, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:COTW]] votes 

message: :Nominated July 29, 2006; needs at least 9 votes by August 19, 2006
; Support:
# Yvwv 19:09, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Textile]] (7 votes, stays until [[August 19]])

message: Sorry if this annoys some people, but I always make this sort of list for articles that need a lot of work. Here's what needs to be done. Support, refute, or propose suggestions as needed.
*Introductory Paragraph: Remember the huge argument over the definition of textile, fabric, and cloth? If not, read some of the comments above. One of them provided a comprehensive definition of each term that everyone seemed to agree with, which could be incorporated into the article.
*Sources and Types/Treatments: These should be placed with the lists that they correspond to (which should not be lists.)
*Uses: Surely the uses of textiles can be discussed in MORE than two sentences?
*Lists: We should turn these into paragraphs. For the types of textile, we should state the different materials within each division (animal, plant, synthetic, etc.), what plant, animal, or petroleum product they are derived from, and what they are used for. For the processes involved in making textiles, we should give brief descriptions of each process (carding, spinning, weaving, etc.), and which processes are used for which types of textiles. Most of this information can be found in the articles for each type of textile or for each process.
Thanks. Ellie041505 13:30, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Add Stainproofing info. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.211.177 (talk) 16:24, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  To Be Done 

message: Hello. Can someone check/edit the caption on the second illustration? I think the "right to left" order is reversed in the identifcation of the fabrics as shown. Thanks, Stu. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.46.249.78 (talk) 21:18, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Order is reversed

message: There is almost nothing in the article about breathable fabrics, e.g. for garments, save for a tiny note on wicking of perspiration under ingeo. - Neparis (talk) 00:50, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Breathable fabrics 

message: Reassessed to the new C-class; this article still needs a lot of work. - PKM (talk) 18:54, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Reassessment

message: I have included Marisol Deluna yet her name continually gets removed.
Despite adding three references http://glo.msn.com/relationships/glos-latina-girl-crushes-6003.gallery?photoId=21361 GLO.msn.com, http://www.hyundaiusa.com/about-hyundai/diversity/common/assets/Hyundai_Adelante.pdf Hyundaiusa.com, http://www.nysartorialist.com/2010/05/housing-works-6th-annual-design-on-dime.html Nysartorialist.com (in addition to those found off and online) I was not aware that inclusions had to be household names, yet rather notables to the subject discussed.  One of the terrific user benefits of Wikipedia is to inform.  Why bother reading articles otherwise?
She is not as notable as the others listed, this is understood as she does not create designs in a traditional manner such as runway shows.  Inclusions should not be based on this.  She is known for her prints and my references reflect this as does this list of clients that have benefited from her print driven designs. 
::: Removed promotional client list duplicated from Talk:Marisol Deluna
I am asking to have the edit of removal be reverted or perhaps put in a different category in which textiles can be used beyond traditional fashion designers- Especially for those seeking information on those who are not focused on mainstream textile or fashion designers. Thank you. ElizabethCB123 (talk) 16:24, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You added her name to a list of designers that "can be easily recognized by their signature print driven designs.", so please demonstrate that she can, with a reliable sources that say she can. None of the links you provided did that. Mtking (edits)  21:58, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Point taken.  However, I did not add her inclusion originally.  Her name was removed and I replaced her.  I will focus on her article and in time revisit this inclusion.  Thank you! ElizabethCB123 (talk) 05:18, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fashion and Textile Designer Inclusions 

message: Some explanation for changing the "Sources" section to "Further reading."
After finding no mention of the authors Good or Fisher in the article text, I searched the revision history to determine when these sources were added and what (if any) other content was added at the same time. Revision diffs for the additions of both the Nora Good and Irene Fisher sources show that only the source information was added.
Having also moved the Duplessis source to an inline citation, I removed the citation cleanup banner when I changed "Sources" to "Further reading." —Shelley V. Adams 03:30, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation cleanup 

message: The name of the Rawhide (textile) article is in direct conflict with the introduction to this article. It would appear something needs to be changed.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 22:27, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, Rawhide (disambiguation) redirects to Rawhide, which is in fact a disambiguation page. This needs admin attention to delete the redirect page, so the articles may be titled sensibly. Perhaps further discussion would be better kept at Talk:Rawhide (textile). __ Just plain Bill (talk) 23:50, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rawhide (textile) 

message: The Wikitable showing the top ten exporters seems misplaced here. I think it belongs in History of textiles. If there are no objections I'll move it there in about a week. Jodosma (talk) 23:36, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I tried to move the table to a different part of this article without success, wherever you move it, it makes a mess so I'm leaving it now before I lose the will to live. Jodosma (talk) 00:04, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Misplaced box

message: The definitions in the opening paragraph of the article are very narrow in scope.  For example, to characterize all textiles as "woven", is misleading, as it is misleading to define yarn without including the mention of fibers that rise from extrusion.  Even if the whole article is to be rewritten, could some short term improvement of the first paragraph be done until then?Cobaltcanarycherry (talk) 03:46, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I do use "textile" exclusively for woven fabrics, well, I also call my felted pieces textiles, but they are made from textiles or yarns. I agree that extruded yarns are missing, and the article seems to say only natural fibres are used to produce yarn. Please do improve at least this part, the synethic fibres. Can we look into "textiles" more, though? --(AfadsBad (talk) 12:53, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Respectfully, to indicate that all textiles are woven or felted is to exclude all knitted, crocheted, netted or braided textiles.  I am particularly concerned by this exclusion as it appears that fabrics constituted by hand were developed previous to those that had to be loomed.Cobaltcanarycherry (talk) 23:39, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition of textile and yarn 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Textile. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080215001128/http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/02/piezoelectric-n.html to http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/02/piezoelectric-n.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120507085636/http://www.senature.com/research/publications/cocoon-silk-a-natural-architecture to http://www.senature.com/research/publications/cocoon-silk-a-natural-architecture
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1142
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:35, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Textile. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060723073411/http://www.textilemuseum.org/PDFs/TextileTerms.pdf to http://www.textilemuseum.org/PDFs/TextileTerms.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150501074855/http://www.textile-technology.com/2010/04/milk-fabric-clothing-raises-a-few-eyebrows/ to http://www.textile-technology.com/2010/04/milk-fabric-clothing-raises-a-few-eyebrows/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120117025006/http://ask.yahoo.com/ask/20010315.html to http://ask.yahoo.com/ask/20010315.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:46, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Blended fabric redirects to here but does not end in any specific subtopic. It is not explained or defined. --Manorainjan 09:23, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blended fabric 

message: I'm proposing merging Clothing material into this article. Clothing material has no references and the material discussed could easily be folded into Textile. Leschnei (talk) 22:57, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but remember that not all clothing materials are textile, and not all textiles are clothing material. The state of the clothing material article (awful) means that a redirect would improve the project, but adding anything from there to here would be a mistake. -Roxy, the dog. barcus 06:25, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The proposal is for a merge not a redirect, which for the substantive reasons just mentioned would be an encyclopedic mistake. If the responses to it are being tallied, this is a NO. --Futhark|Talk 06:34, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: That is an excellent point, a redirect would solve things very nicely. Let's see if anyone else feels like expressing an opinion. Leschnei (talk) 12:29, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

text: While not all clothing materials are textiles-- the actual article (clothing materials) is some 99% about textiles. Merge the lead section of "Clothing materials" to become a sub-section of "Textile#Uses" and drop all other parts of "clothing materials". If one is so disposed, someone can also create a sub-section of "clothing to be about clothing materials. tahc chat 19:39, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible merge with Clothing material 

message: What - no mention of stuff? nor how it is of the same root as the German stoff?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.148.36.42 (talk) 20:38, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Stuff/Stoff

message: Wikipedia has no article on woven roving, which predates the invention of spread tow fabric. I have seen it as fibreglass textiles used in layup fabrication. Are there significant differences between the two? Just plain Bill (talk) 12:10, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: IMHO, not really, but then again I have no sources with which to help. -Roxy the inedible dog . wooF 12:15, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Woven roving 

message: Rajiv Please explain how this reference supports the text. Thanks. -Roxy the inedible dog . wooF 14:59, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Firstly it is not citeation, It is citation. The citation was required for Wool refers to the hair of the domestic sheep or goat, which is distinguished from other types of animal hair in that the individual strands are coated with scales and tightly crimped, and the wool as a whole is coated with a wax mixture known as lanolin (sometimes called wool grease), which is waterproof and dirtproof.
*Roxy You deleted[[]]
* ][The text on Page 142---Wool, commonly used for warm clothing, refers to the hair of the domestic goat or sheep and it is coated with oil known as lanolin, which is water-proof and dirt-proof making a comfortable fabric for dresses, suits, and sweaters. Now you tell me why it is not supporting. RAJIVVASUDEV (talk) 16:09, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: But Lanolin has no water proof or dirt proofing effect on wool garments, as it is all scoured out in processing. Lanolin in wool garments would make them more attractive to dirt not less. The citation does not support the text. for spelling, see here -Roxy the inedible dog . wooF 17:09, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Roxy Do not manipulate and make out meanings of your interest. Who is asking about scoured wool? The text in the article is about Lanolin containing wool. READ IT AGAIN Wool refers to the hair of the domestic sheep or goat, which is distinguished from other types of animal hair in that the individual strands are coated with scales and tightly crimped, and the wool as a whole is coated with a wax mixture known as lanolin (sometimes called wool grease), which is waterproof and dirtproof. For spellings, I will clothe you, for now; otherwise, on Wikipedia, nothing is invisible, like you try to do from the talk pages after deleting the references and making other users demoralized.RAJIVVASUDEV (talk) 17:43, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Roxy The reference is added to the content in the article. Not for your  BUT.RAJIVVASUDEV (talk) 18:26, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Roxy the citation actually does support the text, the section of the article the citation refers to are sources that textiles are made from, including wool, and does not refer to wool that has already been processed and woven, so it's possible that it may or may not contain lanolin. As you can see that section is a list of animal fibre sources. At any rate, a negligible amount of lanolin will still remain in the wool, even after it is woven. Coryphantha Talk 21:30, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thankyou User: Coryphantha, for understanding the fact and restoring the citation/edit. I hope Roxy will realize and would not mind discussing on the talk page before reverting my edits. Best regards RAJIVVASUDEV (talk) 01:44, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  You're very welcome. User: RAJIVVASUDEV. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coryphantha (talk • contribs) 02:20, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  poor citeation 

message: Before the 18th century, textile goods were synonym with piece-goods because of certain limitations of resources and trading systems. We can not forget the role of Draper, cloth merchants and mercery. I have added a section in the subject article with the name piece goods. Kindly review and advise to elaborate. Thanks and regardsRAJIVVASUDEV (talk) 02:19, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: In order to advise and elaborate I have decided that certain limitations of sources need to be lifted irrevocably and have removed it as adequately categorised without your WP:AGF contribution. -Roxy the inedible dog . wooF 06:31, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sir, Your recent edits are not acceptable, WP:NPA,WP:DE ,Wikipedia:Tendentious editingInformation is well sourced with reliable sources, you are repeatedly making personal attacks, and using false language wikipedia:RPA. This is not the first time you are engaging me and ultimately cause a block. Please WP: AGF avoid this and do not harm the project for your ego. Peace. Having any doubts please discuss them on the talk page and conclude. Thanks and regards RAJIVVASUDEV (talk) 07:07, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

text:  Your edit summary for reverting is poor. Please note there is no single article that explains what these piece-goods were besides mentioning. Hence the topic deserves a section here. And readers must know what they were and why they were produced. Thanks and regardsRAJIVVASUDEV (talk) 07:31, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

text: Wikipedia maintains an inclusion threshold of "verifiability, not truth." Hence you can not delete any info/RS. ThanksRAJIVVASUDEV (talk) 07:46, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Please indent the messages as outlined in wp:THREAD and wp:INDENT — See Help:Using talk pages. Thanks. -Roxy the inedible dog . wooF 08:45, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  RegardsRAJIVVASUDEV (talk) 08:56, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Respected Sir Rajiv, you already know I am an expert. -Roxy the inedible dog . wooF 09:06, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Haha, No sir, you are not, but you underrated yourself by considering yourself (as a self-appointed expert); you are high above the policies. you are allowed to use false language, can  bite and allowed to override any Ps  WP:5P.RAJIVVASUDEV (talk) 09:39, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

text: And you can revert the content even with verifiable accuracy, citing reliable, authoritative sources. So you are more than an expert. RegardsRAJIVVASUDEV (talk) 09:59, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Piecegoods/(piece goods)

message: It is more helpful to know about historical terms for a reader.@ , kindly do not remove the sourced information.RV (talk) 09:30, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Your badly written lecture notes do not make any sense in English. By re-introducing them, you have edit-warred. -Roxy  . wooF 09:35, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  Something obvious to you, may not be to someone else.reader. BTW what is bad in it?  Read guide lines hereWP:HISTINFO. Thanks RV (talk) 09:50, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Blends (Blended textiles)

message: @ You have removed a sourced information[] with this ed sum Nonsense. textiles for transmitting info. hahahaha. Can you explain the reason? RV (talk) 15:07, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  What ?

message: A textile is a flexible material made by creating an interlocking network of yarns or threads, which are produced by spinning raw fibres (from either natural or synthetic sources) into long and twisted lengths.Textiles are then formed by weaving, knitting, crocheting, knotting, tatting, felting, bonding, or braiding these yarns together.
:Textile, any filament, fibre, or yarn that can be made into fabric or cloth, and the resulting material itself.
* Comment: Lead in the article limits textiles to the "fabrics" only in spite of the fact that the term "textile" is a broader term and includes fibers, yarns and fabrics, and technical textiles, etc. Can we have a discussion and make a consensus?  Thanks RV (talk) 13:39, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Textile

message: Can you write fashion as a type of clothing 41.217.55.121 (talk) 19:37, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: No. -Roxy  the dog. wooF 20:47, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  fashion 

message: § Handling of edit-warring behaviors.
@ Your recent attempts to vandalize this page have been reversed. Stop your nonsense because there is no denying the link between textiles, wet processing, and water consumption. Keeping the readers in mind, the section deserves a place in the article. And let me do that. You are welcome to discuss this here. Do not revert the edits, especially when they belong to a reliable source.. RV (talk) 13:12, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Significance of water in textiles

message: In section Health impacts, there is copy and paste edit Chemicals use, advantage and health impacts, copy and paste edit from Chemical finishing of textiles. For attribution see page history. Thanks RV (talk) 12:52, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Attribution