Talk:Shorts

message: Does any body know which school the boy with the purple blazer and grey shorts belongs too?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.0.60.43 (talk) 23:30, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: School

message: The following have been identified as issues in this articles. Wikipedians from countries other than the USA are asked to help resolve some of them as many result from a lack of a broader multicultural worldview.  Please add to this list if needed.--Lendorien (talk) 17:13, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup TODO List

message: I added the missing (!!!) Short Shorts to the list along with annotations and external references. (Daisy Dukes and hot pants were a much later spin-off of short shorts.) The entry also mentions The Purple People Eater and the Short Shorts song. For those who might be interested, I didn't consider the lyrics appropriate for the main article (feel free to disagree), but I include the gist of the lyrics here.
In the Short Shorts song, these lyrics are repeated 3 times interspersed with saxophone and guitar solos:
:::Who wears short shorts ...
:::We wear short shorts ...
:::They're such short shorts ...
:::We like short shorts ...
:::Who wears short shorts ...
:::We wear short shorts.
In The Purple People Eater song, the chorus and the people eater itself refer to the earlier Short Shorts song as well as the fashion in two of its stanzas. For example:
:::Well bless my soul, rock and roll,
:::Flying purple people eater.
:::Pidgeon-toed, undergrowed,
:::Flyin' purple people eater.
:::(We wear short shorts.)
:::Friendly little people eater
:::What a sight to see!
--UnicornTapestry (talk) 16:53, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Short shorts 

message: I wish someone would write about breeches, specifically where I can get some nowadays.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.183.112.208 (talk) 21:43, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: breeches

message: The article seemed to be riddled with vandalism and inaccuracies.  Speculation runs rampant and even goes so far as to insult a university which seemingly has nothing to do with the article.  True clean up is desperately needed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.192.105.34 (talk) 03:22, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: June 2008, vandalism detected

message: Since the beggining of the scouting movement there has been an asociation with shorts and until not so long ago, was one of the very few reasons why a grown man would wear shorts in the UK.(86.152.184.218 (talk) 20:57, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Asociation with scouting 

message: My pants definately never cover my entire leg as the article says. Not that you'd be able to see, because not being insane, I wear trousers or sometimes shorts over them. 89.243.204.148 (talk) 21:06, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  My pants 

message: Agreed! This is silly.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.156.37.54 (talk) 13:03, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Totally agree that a new photo needs to be used, I'm supportive of a composite if "everyone" is represented. Anyone able to take this task on? SarahStierch (talk) 18:51, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  New picture needed 

message: I've tagged this article.
Poorly written:
The "board" refers to surfboards although many others also wear them.
Inaccurate:
Hot pants were very popular in the early 1970s, especially with baseball's Philadelphia Phillies, who created a unit of usherettes called the Hot Pants Patrol.
Despite the name, the Hot Pants Patrol wore a kind of all-in-one tunic with short, tight legs attached, so although they gave a hot-pants effect, they were not hot pants at all. See [here] and [here]. Also the popularity of hot-pants began in the late '60s.
Contradictory statements:
...but the perception of shorts as being only for young boys took several decades to change and to some extent still exists in certain circles.
but:
Today, shorts are worn by either sex from birth through old age without any stigma attached.
Description of boyshorts does not match that on boyshorts page (problem may be with either definition).
Bad definitions and baseless generalisations:
Slackettes: A term coined in the late 20th century by the fashion cognoscenti of the New York City neighborhood of Nolita 
Hoaxy or too limited in usage. The term might have been coined in Nolita, but it doesn't seem to have ever been known anywhere else. 
Indeed, the Times of India is the only source listed for "Slackettes" -- and the link is a fashion column reporting it as pure hearsay from half a planet away.  Seems like a hoax or a joke. 72.244.120.22 (talk) 23:41, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: And the mention of both "hot pants" and "Daisy Dukes" in the Transatlantic terminological confusions section imply that they are generic synonyms for shorts, when they refer to specific, female only, garments. Wschart (talk) 16:39, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Multiple Issues 

message: Matters are further complicated by the fact that "shorts" in American English can refer to underwear
Despite being born and raised in the USA, I have never heard this usage, except in the listed (British?) exception "boxer shorts."  Can someone find a citation to verify this statement?  Perhaps it is regional usage? Carychan (talk) 08:04, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This is according to List of words having different meanings in British and American English: M-Z#S. Alarics (talk) 09:32, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

text: Dictionaries should record usage, which means a source of that usage in better dictionaries. If there is no source there is an error in the dictionary. 91.154.169.156 (talk) 06:55, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Shorts" as "Underpants" 

message: The style of shorts are not reversing. They are actually getting longer. Usually only older men wear short shorts now a days.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.82.187.246 (talk) 14:51, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Either way, the problem for this article is finding reliable sources to support such claims. -- Alarics (talk) 18:00, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Style Reverse?  

message: It did not start in 19th Century, and it was not out of the blue, there is history that starts with ancient times. Why there is nothing about it in this article? 37.144.65.76 (talk) 20:19, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: If you have information that is missing from an article, it is up to you to add it, but you must cite a reliable source. This would be more constructive than asking why somebody else hasn't added it. Maybe nobody else was aware of this history that you say you know about. Wikipedia is a collaborative volunteer project which anyone may edit. Every Wikipedia article is a work in progress. -- Alarics (talk) 06:57, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

text: That article may not be factually reliable, as it is a commercial advertisement for a particular product, and does not cite any source for its assertions. -- Alarics (talk) 09:19, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where is history of shorts? 

message: I can see the benefits of having the main image showing people wearing shorts, but I don't think having the majority of the pictures being of women's behinds in tight/short shorts is very representative. I've changed it to a picture of two men in swimming trunks for now, but I don't think it's the best option.
I do think that any image used as the main one on this page should show a style of shorts that is one of the ones that is listed and described in the article. Anarchyshake (talk) 04:02, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Main Image of Shorts 

message: I am reading queen Camilla and this is in the book. Yet I do not know what city shorts are. 91.154.169.156 (talk) 06:56, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: They are mentioned in the article. Go to the Styles section, and look at the tail end of  the sub-section about Bermuda shorts. HiLo48 (talk) 07:01, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  City shorts