Talk:Glossary of textile manufacturing

message: * Oppose. See Category talk:Glossaries. Rfrisbietalk 02:48, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transfer to Wikipedia? 

message: --CopyToWiktionaryBot 13:15, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  2007-02-7 Automated pywikipediabot message 

message: See discussion at Talk:Glossary of textile terminology#Merge. - PKM (talk) 20:47, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You may want to read and apply Wikipedia:Manual of Style (glossaries). -- œ™ 16:30, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge here?

message: I'm all for copying to Wiktionary but I hope that doesn't mean this glossary will be deleted afterwards.. I happen to find it quite useful anyway, and there are many such glossaries and indexes on Wikipedia.. plus this is a great starting point leading to other articles. It does need a bit of work however.. -- œ™ 02:00, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This should be copied to wiktionary and merged into the existing wikt:Appendix:Glossary of textile manufacturing terms. bd2412 T 14:53, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: re: Copy to Wiktionary

message: In addition to the suggestion made eight months ago that this page should be edited in a manner consistent with Wikipedia:Manual of Style (glossaries), I think it would be beneficial to remove most of the links from the "Terms" column (especially red links and links to disambiguation pages), and instead link relevant topics in the "Description" column, as these links are more likely to lead to information that will be useful to the reader.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 15:45, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  General comment 

message: As someone has  said, this page needs a lot of work (or should it be humanely disposed of ... ?)
If "A.K.A." is a textile term, then I'm a Dutchman, but not the one who put a couple of Dutch language terms in here.
I think the transfer to the dictionary is unsuitable because of the vague definitions.
Has anyone any strong views about radical surgery here?
Afterbrunel (talk) 22:29, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd support merging textile terminology and textile manufacturing, but sewing should be kept separate and I would even split these to give a new List of fabric types, for those materials that are simply fabric types. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:07, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  . glossary of textile terminology has now been merged into glossary of textile manufacturing. I hope that after some post-merge cleanup, we will soon have the best of both articles. --DavidCary (talk) 22:05, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scope, and accuracy 

message: I'm up for radical surgery.  I suggest the entries here be merged into Glossary of textile manufacturing or Glossary of sewing terms, or abandoned, as appropriate. - PKM (talk) 20:42, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd support merging textile terminology and textile manufacturing, but sewing should be kept separate and I would even split these to give a new List of fabric types, for those materials that are simply fabric types. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:07, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  . glossary of textile terminology has now been merged into glossary of textile manufacturing. I hope that after some post-merge cleanup, we will soon have the best of both articles. --DavidCary (talk) 22:05, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: Is grogram (like in 'Old Grogram' Edward Vernon) the same as grosgrain? It is obscure because I don't know much about this. Komitsuki (talk) 13:01, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grogram 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Glossary of textile manufacturing. 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/20050412130056/http://www.isbona.com/vol5no1win01b.html to http://www.isbona.com/vol5no1win01b.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) 01:46, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I have reformatted the "main" glossary section using , which makes each item accessible as its own link within the page. I have not done anything with the second table, which should be integrated on an item-by-item basis (with references!) into the main glossary (or discarded if there's agreement that it's not helpful). - PKM (talk) 21:39, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I boldly removed the second table, having checked the history and looked at the terms line by line. It's been there since a merge in 2014 (mentioned on this page a few topics up), complete with cleanup tags. Roughly 45 of 134 terms might fit into the glossary and aren't already there. This includes the acronyms that would be listed and defined as words rather than as acronyms, e.g. PA for polyamide and Y/D for yarn-dyed. Most of the rest are acronyms related to fashion/garment manufacturing and marketing, with a few oddities such as 'a.k.a.' and ABC (somebody saw Glengarry Glen Ross). I apologise for the delay in posting here after my edit; something came up unexpectedly. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 11:07, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

text: That follows the Manual of Style for Glossaries, so I'd say yes. Pinging other editors who've worked on the article recently:  and , what do you think? BlackcurrantTea (talk) 11:45, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Works for me. - PKM (talk) 14:21, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Changes have been made! Cheers, Heddles (talk) 00:05, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reformat