This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Clothing article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
Index,
1Auto-archiving period: 30 days
![]() |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
i just love those kind of clothes,it like my kind of type of clothes.well nothing to say so sorry. buh-bye.
Why does this article not include a definition for each of the icons listed in cleaning instructions? I have a foreign item, do not understand the text, and am trying to figure out what each icon means. I thought maybe wiki would help, but you haven't even included a link to relevant info... :(
Currently: "In other societies (including most modern societies), no laws prohibit lower-status people wearing high status garments, but the high cost of status garments effectively limits purchase and display. In current Western society, only the rich can afford haute couture. " Leaving aside haute couture, which is worn by very, very few people (and quickly knocked off, so it's hard for most people to tell the difference), this statement is rather a distortion of the contemporary American situation, wherein a decent business suit and accessories costs far less than the designer warmups and high-end sneakers (not to mention bling) affected by many socioeconomically "deprived" persons.
I've been working on the introduction. I think it is more clearly written now, but it only focuses on the function and definition of clothing and doesn't summarize any of the latter issues of the article. Also, the details about accessories, etc. may be a bit out of place in the introduction, which typically gives an overview rather than worry about minutae. So, two issues: a)Expand the scope of the introduction; and b)Consider creating a new section which addresses the definition (what is vs. what is not clothing)...Or does the way it is seem to work well enough as it is?
Just a stash:
Cloth Cultures in Prehistoric Europe: the Bronze Age evidence from Hallstatt
The Prehistoric Development of Clothing: Archaeological Implications of a Thermal Model
http://www.ancientcraft.co.uk/reenactment/prehistoric_clothes.html
Lice Reveal Clues to Human Evolution [ [1]] "Reed and colleagues have also looked at the split between head and clothing lice for clues as to when humans began wearing clothes. They found that clothing lice diverged from head lice between 80,000 and 170,000 years ago, most likely at the earlier end of that range." Kortoso ( talk)
In the partially forested regions of East Africa, as bipedalism became dominant, it seems males started to need sun protection in vital areas for the first time. Loin cloths were invented out of neccissity. Once the value of this protection became became institutionalized, it was a small step to extend the use of clothing for more general weather protection and warmth.
Hominids likely would not have ventured away from their East African homeland into colder areas without clothing, however the males could not have sustained bipedalism even in their homeland without loin cloths. It seems loin cloths had to be invented concurrently with the transition to sustained bipedalism, while still in Africa.
64.66.219.205 ( talk) 05:44, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
Is there scholarly opinion afoot [sic] re: the chicken/egg perspective on the advent of clothing, perhaps analogous to opinion that the evolution of human intelligence was directed by hirsuited-ness; namely, hair [fur] began receding, inexorably favouring survival of the species members of greater intellect, intellect sufficient to react by inventing clothing, rather than perishing from exposure. Had our intellect not grown and responded satisfactorily, we wouldn't now be discussing this.
And opinion re: alternating climatic cycles; periods of greater or lesser glaciation. Favouring the development of clothing directly, or indirectly by precipitating the fur loss, possibly.
Putting my ancestral hat on, I'm confident my first priority would not be a loin leaf; rather, fashioning something to ease the discomfort of my feet after yet-another day of hunting and gathering, all while carting the kids and tools around. 122.151.210.84 ( talk) 10:57, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 9 January 2024 and 12 April 2024. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Ansmehta (
article contribs). Peer reviewers:
Samandeepkaur002,
Arjunverma 28,
Arshdeepkaur015,
Mabhullar,
Randeepsingh002,
Sandeep kaur028.
— Assignment last updated by Arshdeepkaur015 ( talk) 05:53, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
How about a historical section of prior teachings on the topic of clothing and health, by advocates of 'loose and comfortable clothing' (of which there have been several, some in the ' natural health' communities? Surely a history of teaching about 'what is appropriate clothing' is not out of order.
Historical Perspectives on Clothing Ethics
Ancient Traditions:
Medieval and Renaissance Period:
19th and 20th Centuries:
Modern Movements:
Exploring these historical teachings provides valuable context for understanding contemporary perspectives on clothing ethics and sheds light on evolving societal attitudes towards clothing and personal adornment. MaynardClark ( talk) 05:18, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Clothing article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
Index,
1Auto-archiving period: 30 days
![]() |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
i just love those kind of clothes,it like my kind of type of clothes.well nothing to say so sorry. buh-bye.
Why does this article not include a definition for each of the icons listed in cleaning instructions? I have a foreign item, do not understand the text, and am trying to figure out what each icon means. I thought maybe wiki would help, but you haven't even included a link to relevant info... :(
Currently: "In other societies (including most modern societies), no laws prohibit lower-status people wearing high status garments, but the high cost of status garments effectively limits purchase and display. In current Western society, only the rich can afford haute couture. " Leaving aside haute couture, which is worn by very, very few people (and quickly knocked off, so it's hard for most people to tell the difference), this statement is rather a distortion of the contemporary American situation, wherein a decent business suit and accessories costs far less than the designer warmups and high-end sneakers (not to mention bling) affected by many socioeconomically "deprived" persons.
I've been working on the introduction. I think it is more clearly written now, but it only focuses on the function and definition of clothing and doesn't summarize any of the latter issues of the article. Also, the details about accessories, etc. may be a bit out of place in the introduction, which typically gives an overview rather than worry about minutae. So, two issues: a)Expand the scope of the introduction; and b)Consider creating a new section which addresses the definition (what is vs. what is not clothing)...Or does the way it is seem to work well enough as it is?
Just a stash:
Cloth Cultures in Prehistoric Europe: the Bronze Age evidence from Hallstatt
The Prehistoric Development of Clothing: Archaeological Implications of a Thermal Model
http://www.ancientcraft.co.uk/reenactment/prehistoric_clothes.html
Lice Reveal Clues to Human Evolution [ [1]] "Reed and colleagues have also looked at the split between head and clothing lice for clues as to when humans began wearing clothes. They found that clothing lice diverged from head lice between 80,000 and 170,000 years ago, most likely at the earlier end of that range." Kortoso ( talk)
In the partially forested regions of East Africa, as bipedalism became dominant, it seems males started to need sun protection in vital areas for the first time. Loin cloths were invented out of neccissity. Once the value of this protection became became institutionalized, it was a small step to extend the use of clothing for more general weather protection and warmth.
Hominids likely would not have ventured away from their East African homeland into colder areas without clothing, however the males could not have sustained bipedalism even in their homeland without loin cloths. It seems loin cloths had to be invented concurrently with the transition to sustained bipedalism, while still in Africa.
64.66.219.205 ( talk) 05:44, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
Is there scholarly opinion afoot [sic] re: the chicken/egg perspective on the advent of clothing, perhaps analogous to opinion that the evolution of human intelligence was directed by hirsuited-ness; namely, hair [fur] began receding, inexorably favouring survival of the species members of greater intellect, intellect sufficient to react by inventing clothing, rather than perishing from exposure. Had our intellect not grown and responded satisfactorily, we wouldn't now be discussing this.
And opinion re: alternating climatic cycles; periods of greater or lesser glaciation. Favouring the development of clothing directly, or indirectly by precipitating the fur loss, possibly.
Putting my ancestral hat on, I'm confident my first priority would not be a loin leaf; rather, fashioning something to ease the discomfort of my feet after yet-another day of hunting and gathering, all while carting the kids and tools around. 122.151.210.84 ( talk) 10:57, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 9 January 2024 and 12 April 2024. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Ansmehta (
article contribs). Peer reviewers:
Samandeepkaur002,
Arjunverma 28,
Arshdeepkaur015,
Mabhullar,
Randeepsingh002,
Sandeep kaur028.
— Assignment last updated by Arshdeepkaur015 ( talk) 05:53, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
How about a historical section of prior teachings on the topic of clothing and health, by advocates of 'loose and comfortable clothing' (of which there have been several, some in the ' natural health' communities? Surely a history of teaching about 'what is appropriate clothing' is not out of order.
Historical Perspectives on Clothing Ethics
Ancient Traditions:
Medieval and Renaissance Period:
19th and 20th Centuries:
Modern Movements:
Exploring these historical teachings provides valuable context for understanding contemporary perspectives on clothing ethics and sheds light on evolving societal attitudes towards clothing and personal adornment. MaynardClark ( talk) 05:18, 6 May 2024 (UTC)