Talk:Four-in-hand knot

message: George Bush (senior) always had a Four-in-hand knot  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.214.18.240 (talk) 10:02, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical/Fashion note: 

message: I had inadvertently added the wrong ABOK number in an earlier edit due to two distinct necktie knots having "four-in-hand" as part of their name.  The entry for the "wrong" knot, #2407, which based on an overhand knot with the end threaded through, reads as follows:
::"#2407  The Four-In-Hand.  This tie also has a horsy background, which it has long since lived down.  So much so that I found one person who thought that the name was in some way descriptive of the manner of tying, and that two people with four hands were required for the job."
Regarding the name for #2408 Ashley says, "This is the common Four-In-Hand Knot, called by M. Le Blanc 'The Cravat Knot.'"   It's interesting, given Ashley's "horsy" comment about #2407, that the suggested etymologies in the lead may in fact be referring to a different knot than the one now commonly known by the name...  I'm leaving everything alone for now, but this is an area that additional information may help clarify.   Much of Ashley's information on necktie knots appears to come from H. Le Blanc's book The Art of Tying the Cravat, Philadelphia, 1828; that might be a reasonable place to start.    (Added moments later:  Google Books to the rescue)  --Dfred (talk) 19:44, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another necktie knot called ''four-in-hand'' at some point in the past? 

message: The image sequence is slightly incorrect in step two. The line drawing appears to indicate a wrap around the short end that would not be present in this step. At this step, there should not be a line across the upper right of the knot or a horizontal line at the top center of the knot.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.15.88.48 (talk) 23:31, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I also agree with this. I thought it was a bit of an out of place little notice, which is in fact what drew me to come to the talk page. I'm unfamiliar with the policies regarding removal of such a template, but I do agree it doesn't have a place on this page. 2601:7:6780:30A0:851B:A30:6B96:48E5 (talk) 03:46, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

text: I also agree. Since it's a "drive-by" tagging with no explanation, anybody disagreeing can remove it, so I will. JulianBradfield (talk) 08:03, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tying 

message: What is the etymology?  This needs to be included.Curb Chain (talk) 14:49, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eytmology 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Four-in-hand knot. 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/20140506235717/http://www.apd.army.mil/pdffiles/p670_1.pdf to http://www.apd.army.mil/pdffiles/p670_1.pdf
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) 22:12, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The US Navy citation link is dead, but it is archived:
https://web.archive.org/web/20180123204605/http://www.public.navy.mil/bupers-npc/support/uniforms/uniformregulations/uniformcomponents/Pages/3501_37.aspx
I don't know how to add archived links in the proper format, but here it is.
75.142.43.172 (talk) 01:58, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Navy citation link is dead