Talk:Chain mail

message: does anyone know the latin name for Chainmail as I have searched for MACULA and always end up at spot, blemish etc??? —219.88.43.216 00:19, 18 Jul 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: The lorica hamata might be what you're looking for. Macula does mean spot or blemish, but it also mean "mesh," particularly that of a net, and is the origin of mail in its armor-related meaning. —68.44.65.38 12:29, 23 Dec 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  Latin Name 

message: This is crazy. Can we move it back please? "Chain maille" gets less than 5% of the number of hits of "Chainmail". I know the etymology, but we happen to have a policy of titling articles after the commonly used English term. dab (ᛏ) 11:48, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The statement that it is properly called maille is another oddity - that is French. It’s proper name in English is mail, I believe. Firsteleventh (talk) 13:51, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page Name 

message: ---Would the original poster of the Photographs take them down and rotate them 90 degrees? Thats the way chainmail is supposed to go, by having the mail shown the way it is on this page it is innacurate and misleading.-Dark357g---
:The detail photos are only intended to provide a clear view of the structure, not to be any sort of fashion statement. Chainmail can go any way the maker wants it to go.
::Um - that's true, but with certain limitations.  Hauberks or other shirts of mail typically have the mail oriented so as to fall together, rather than apart.  The closer position of the rings results in more fluid movement of the mail, and therefor greater mobility and comfort to the wearer.  I speak under correction, but I believe that mail armor almost always had its rings oriented in this fashion.  In any case, the photo has been rotated.  --Badger151 04:23, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: FYI, Japanese mail (in the European pattern) was orientated 90 degrees opposite to the Western mail.--82.28.44.83 (talk) 00:36, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo Orientation 

message: I can't seem to move the above posts this section, but Idiot with a gun brings up a good point.  There is a difference between historical mail and modern jewelry mail and weaves.  Jewelery mail often has little to do with the historical concept of mail and it's uses, but some of it's weaves are derived from it, and the terminology comes from there as well.  New article? Sethwoodworth 22:55, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Decorative mail 

message: Japanese mail was neither rivetted nor solid. Thus butted mail did exist and it is weak. The statement that mail was never wore without a gambeson cannot be verified, thus is misleading.
I added more about Japanese mail, but it probably needs some rewording, and I'm a bit strapped for time. --Idiot with a gun 21:23, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The most common weapon on the battlefield was still the spear, and they were very fond of bows. Granted, their spears were quite slash friendly, but thrusts still comprised more than a significant amount of attacks on the battlefield. Tsuka 10:34, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Japanese Mail 

message: Latest reversion was made because it placed the word 'sometimes' in an improper place.  Mail is made of small interlocking rings, not just sometimes.  Sethwoodworth 16:25, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reversion 

message: Believe or not, this has been done. Tuomas Viljanen, a Finnish Medieval re-enactor and former competive swimmer, did test swimming in sea wearing hauberk and chausses in Finland 1993. He described it extremely exhausting but certainly possible. Since mail certainly won't float and the natural body buoyance is reduced by the weight of armour, it requires great effort, but an experienced swimmer can do it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.100.124.218 (talk • contribs) 
:Source? I'd like to know what the armor was made of, at the very least. --Eyrian 07:28, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There was a discussion on swimming in armour on the Plate Armour Talk Page. While not specifically about chainmail, please do provide any citation (video would be a boon) or the type of hauberk, used (ring size, steel type) etc and the distance swam, any currents, and the time it took to complete the feat. -- Xiliquiern 12:09, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Swimming in Armour 

message: I have added a suggested merge to move the European 4-1 page, currently a very small stub, into this article. European 4-1 is a type of chainmail, and I think it would be rather difficult to come up with much to make an entire article on just 4-1 link pattern. --Xiliquiern 17:37, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds great. Go ahead. --Eyrian 17:40, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I think this is an obvious enough case where you don't really need to wait. This article already has as much information on the 4-1 pattern as European 4-1 has anyway. TCC (talk) (contribs) 20:06, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright, I thought so, but wanted at least another person to confirm it. The merge has been completed. If I did something wrong (my first merge) please feel free to correct it - I'll see it in the edit history. Thanks.--Xiliquiern 21:34, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: I've got a few dozen closeup photos of medieval Russian armor from the Kremlin Armoury.  Would they be of use here?  Rklawton 02:32, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Russian armor

message: Hi, I came to this article looking for pictures of historical mail armour. I found pictures of modern reconstructions, and descriptions of how the modern ones differ slightly from historical ones. Could someone please add pictures of surviving medieval suits? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.234.206.177 (talk • contribs).
:I've added an image from commons. --Eyrian 19:20, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures of historical mail 

message: The caption says hauberk, but the armor shown doesn't appear to be knee-length.  According to the article, the waist-length shirt of mail is supposed to be called a byrnie. Pirate Dan 16:04, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Presumably, the image is captioned according to how it is identified at the museum where it's kept. Note the bottom edge is missing. They likely have good reason to believe it was originally knee-length. Since we're in no position to judge from here, we have no good reason to change it. TCC (talk) (contribs) 00:27, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture is a hauberk or a byrnie? 

message: Tyr Anasazi from the tv series Andromeda  was often seen wearing a chainmail vest as seen on this picture 
 , should this be mentioned on the article?--TiagoTiago 20:25, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: IMHO: not really. This is a fantasy costume, albeit a rather fine one. Unless it is of itself in some way noteable, its inclusion would be inappropriate trivia. Gaius Cornelius 13:16, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Seconded Gaius. Mercutio.Wilder 21:07, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tyr Anasazi's chainmail vest. should it be mentioned? 

message: It is just me or does the first paragraph not makes sense when it talks about wounds. It indicates that mail did not protect against brokenbones due to impacts, but did against cuts. Then it goes on to say that medieval medicine treats bruising and broken bones well but not infection (presumably from cuts), but then goes on to make a contradictory statement that the mail was weak at protecting the wearer from the more dangerous injuries (infering cuts), and vice versa.--82.28.44.83 (talk) 00:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: On close reading, it is not contradictory, but unnecessarily complicated.  I've simplified it; hope this helps.  Gwinva (talk) 00:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  First Paragraph 

message: The following paragraph has several problems, mainly due to the fact that it makes assertions without citations, also the tone seems incorrect for a encylopedia;
The majority of this type of mail is manufactured in India using a form of mass-production. Unfortunately this style of mail lacks many of the intricacies of the period mail it is meant to replicate. But, the cost is low. However, there are a handful of people around the world who are attempting to replicate mail in a much more accurate fashion, but unfortunately only a couple seem to have gotten it correct. While this type of mail is extremely durable, its high level of labor tends to make it too cost-prohibitive for all but the most discerning collectors of reproduction armour. Many reenactors tend to prefer the use of welded steel rings that take less time to produce while offering the same protective benefits of riveted mail.
I propose changing the paragraph to read like this:
The majority of this type of mail is manufactured in India using a form of mass-production, reducing the cost. This style of mail lacks some of the intricacies of the period mail it is meant to replicate. There are a handful of people around the world who are attempting to replicate mail in a more accurate fashion. 
It basically read like someone's personal opinion. Master z0b (talk) 02:37, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bias/Original Research 

message: Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't "Kings Maille' just the same bunk as 'double maille' cropping up againt?
Theblindsage 15:37, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  King's Maille? 

message: "Weight distribution is one of the two real drawbacks of mail..."
What's the other one? Never stated.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.230.215.22 (talk) 07:03, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Two drawbacks

message: I was wondering whether chain mail is able to stop (small calibre) bullets. Compared to kevlar, its only slightlty heavier (eg 17 kg to 11kg), has full arm (and can even be fitted with leg) protection (unlike a kevlar vest), and finally, it's much cheaper, easier to repair, ... Finally, if simple iron doesn't suffice, perhaps titanium, carbon tubes (both expensive however) or some type of alloy could be used. Perhaps that some sections that don't need much movement (eg breast, ...) can also be welded together to be able to spread the energy better (if this area of the maille is hit). It does have drawbacks to kevlar (eg no energy spreading, not bullet proof atleast for higher calibres, ...) but I think it's still intresting to do a comparison between the 2 (it may be useful for smaller calibre bullets to heavily reduce (but not eliminate) the damage). Some info at http://www.instructables.com/community/Is-chain-maille-bullet-proof/ and http://www.instructables.com/community/Is-chain-maille-bullet-proof/ If a maille could prove useful, I'm guessing it could potentially be useful (due to its lower cost, repairability, ...) to improve the safety in violent regions (eg guatemala, ...).
KVDP (talk) 17:08, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Bullet resistance

message: Is it necessary to have "unreferenced" templates at every section or is one template at the head of the article sufficient? SpinningSpark 10:05, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe the best solution is for you or another editor to add some references and then remove the tag from the properly referenced sections.Martin Hogbin (talk) 16:54, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Spinningspark, I  agree that excess tags are not desirable, however, Samuraiantiqueworld has shown good faith by addressing the issue by adding references and removing tags.  If you can all continue this process together, the problem will be resolved without the need for edit warring or further dispute resolution.  Good Luck! Martin Hogbin (talk) 08:36, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Where has this suggestion of edit warring come from? I opened an RfC, not an edit war.  The one and only revert in this was by Samuraiantiqueworld.  I do not intend to be forced into dropping all my other projects and give this priority because I do not like the way it is templated.  I have opened an RfC because I do not like the way it is templated, that is what should be discussed, not what my editing schedule should be. SpinningSpark 09:46, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Since Samuraiantiqueworld has stated they are actively working on this article, thus making it clear that this is not a case of  "drive-by" tagging, I am withdrawing this RfC.  Sorry to have caused a commotion. SpinningSpark 10:03, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maintenance templates 

message: Ko'chuga seems to be standard mail, baidana a variant mail made of riveted 'washers', and the bakterets is the combination of mail and plate that shows up all over.
http://www.xenophon-mil.org/rushistory/medievalarmor/russ30.htm
Theblindsage (talk) 08:25, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Russian Mail: Bakhterets, Baidana,  kol'chuga

message: Reference for usage in more than North Africa comes from John Thornton - Atlantic Warfare. It is not my area (the armor thing) so I am hoping someone can seek it out and add it to the Article. B/c mail was used in so-called Sub-Saharan medieval wars.--Inayity (talk) 13:40, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mail was used in other parts of Africa 

message: "The Arabs and Byzantines transmitted chain mail to Europe; and a share in this movement may be attributed to the cultural exchange between East and West during the crusades."
What kind of utter nonsense (is that? It's even in direct contradiction to the rest of the article. "Byzantines" as a faction did not exist prior to 4th century AD; and "Arabs" as a faction didn't exist prior to 7th century AD. Chain mail arrived in Europe or maybe was invented in Europe before 200 BC. Ölet's remove or cut shrot (by the nonsensical sentence) the Laufer quote! 2001:4DD3:9B47:0:8471:DB5A:9759:EC92 (talk) 08:57, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  nonsense in Bertold Laufer quote 

message: https://balkancelts.wordpress.com/tag/ciumesti-burial/
About the oldest recovered chain mail armour (from the chieftain grave mentioned in the article). 2001:4DD3:9B47:0:8471:DB5A:9759:EC92 (talk) 08:59, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  this link should be used 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Mail (armour). 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://archive.is/20130113011809/http://www.ericsecho.org/investigation2.htm to http://www.ericsecho.org/investigation2.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929141530/http://www.vam.ac.uk/res_cons/conservation/journal/consjournal37/thetreatment/index.html to http://www.vam.ac.uk/res_cons/conservation/journal/consjournal37/thetreatment/index.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050305111420/http://www.armatura.connectfree.co.uk/arma/mail.htm to http://www.armatura.connectfree.co.uk/arma/mail.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131214114205/http://corvuschainmaille.ning.com/ to http://corvuschainmaille.ning.com/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070711214725/http://homepage.ntlworld.com/trevor.barker/farisles/guilds/armour/mail.htm to http://homepage.ntlworld.com/trevor.barker/farisles/guilds/armour/mail.htm
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) 08:18, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 
The result of the move request was: moved (page mover nac)  Flooded with them hundreds 07:58, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Mail (armour) →  – Per WP:NATURALDISAMBIGUATION and WP:COMMONNAME. Rreagan007 (talk) 01:12, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps but being technically incorrect doesn’t automatically disqualify a name. Attempts to change Killer whale to Orca on the grounds that they aren’t actually whales had been rejected on more than one occasion.--67.68.28.220 (talk) 18:27, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, but in this case the suggestion is to move from the technically correct to the technically incorrect. Given that there's a perfectly good REDIRECT in place, a move seems unreasonable. - Snori (talk) 21:17, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Chain mail is the common name, whether technically correct or not, so Wikipedia naming policy is clearly in support of this move. And being able to eliminate the parenthetical disambiguation with a natural disambiguation makes it an even stronger case. Rreagan007 (talk) 23:20, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Common names do not override correct names. See: "Ambiguous or inaccurate names for the article subject, as determined in reliable sources, are often avoided even though they may be more frequently used by reliable sources."ZXCVBNM (TALK) 04:27, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: "Chain mail" is less ambiguous than "mail". And it is not an inaccurate name either. The term "Chain mail" has been used for almost 200 years now. While it's not the actual historical name that was used in the middle ages, it is a commonly used and accurate modern name for this type of armour. Rreagan007 (talk) 19:20, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

text: *Yes you may. Srnec (talk) 04:55, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

text: The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Boy, this was a dumb move, if only for the reason that the article title is no longer the primary term used throughout the text, which has the effect of the lead seeming to argue against the title by using "mail" and "maille" first—and then the rest of the article uses "mail" all but exclusively. There was absolutely no reason for this. None whatsoever. WP Ludicer (talk) 08:38, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 4 November 2018 

message: I would suspect a link to French maillot "shirt". Maikel (talk) 08:51, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Etymology

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: not moved. (non-admin closure) Melmann 20:33, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Chain mail →  – Was moved incorrectly from that title, and without consensus (5-3). All reliable sources and experts in the area use "mail", as does the article itself. A redirect is sufficient to draw in the people who are mistaken about what it's called. I would have just moved it myself, but the redirect blocks me. Magic9mushroom (talk) 05:04, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: It really doesn't matter if its wp:correct, 'chain mail' is decidedly the wp:commonname  and it meets all of the WP:CRITERIA for page names.  The fact it's 'incorrect' doesn't change that it is what most people call it—blindlynx (talk) 16:07, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 26 June 2021 

message: The article claims "Sometime during the 14th century European mail makers started to transition from round rivets to wedge shaped rivets but continued using alternating rows of solid rings.", however, this is not cited. The following citation (53) does not specify when this transition occurred. OzGardi (talk) 21:01, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transition from Round Riveted to Wedge Riveted Not Cited