This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
History of the bikini 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 |
![]() | History of the bikini has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened: |
This is an interesting article but I find the present title rather strange. In its present form, it would seem to refer to the history of the island ( Bikini Atoll) rather than to the article of clothing. I would suggest History of the bikini would be more correct and less confusing. Perhaps you could just move it. - Ipigott ( talk) 17:33, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
As to the title, I propose that the name of the article be changed to "History of swimwear", as it covers and could cover more than history of bikini. Enthusiast ( talk) 02:35, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
The image File:Jaynemansfield4.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
The following images also have this problem:
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 08:44, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
This article uses way too many of them. Will the primary author remove all but those s/he deems most important? Calliopejen1 ( talk) 14:46, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
See File:FourFavorites3101.jpg... AnonMoos ( talk) 11:09, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
According to this edit, the statement that "Bollywood actress Sharmila Tagore struck a memorable moment in 1967 when she appeared in a bikini in An Evening in Paris" is a POV statement. Can that accusation be clarified, please? Otherwise there may be no reason to keep that inline tag. Aditya( talk • contribs) 06:20, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Aditya -- I don't want to get involved in edit warring over this, but that section doesn't really belong on this article (though in a lightly-modified form it might fit on another article)... AnonMoos ( talk) 20:15, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
There was nothing that could really be called an organized feminist movement in 1951, and the title of the reference given refers to ca. 1970, not 1951. AnonMoos ( talk) 17:36, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
They were showgirl performing costumes, not generally swimwear, and were not worn by ordinary respectable women. AnonMoos ( talk) 03:52, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
"Modern Girl Magazine, a fashion magazine from the United States, was quoted in 1957 as saying: "it is hardly necessary to waste words over the so-called bikini since it is inconceivable that any girl with tact and decency would ever wear such a thing" This statement looks dubious to me; it's too convenient to be true. The source for it is only a newspaper article, which mentions it as a bit of a trivia. A Google search for "Modern Girl Magazine" only yields mentions of this alleged statement. I was unable to verify that such a magazine even existed, let alone ever made that statement. Aquila89 ( talk) 20:28, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
Aquila89, I am sure you are right, and that this quote is bogus - I was just going to suggest the same. As someone interested in 1950s design I have collected contemporary fashion magazines for many years. I have never encountered a "Modern Girl Magazine" or found any reference to it except for this quote, which seems to have surfaced about five years ago. I think this is a similar case to the "Housekeeping Monthly Good Wife's Guide" - In other words a journalistic invention. Jellyandjocko ( talk) 23:17, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
The whole section is about swimwears and beachwears, not about bikini at all. Does it really belong here? Maybe we need to move to a more relevant article. Aditya( talk • contribs) 12:17, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
Ewawer (Enthusiast), when adding material to this article, such as this content you added because of what was stated in the #Title of article section above, you should make sure that you are adding sourced material. WP:Reliably sourced. No WP:Dead links, nothing with a Template:Citation needed tag. This is supposed to be a WP:Good article. If it does not remain a WP:Google article, it can be validly subject to WP:Good article reassessment. Flyer22 ( talk) 03:12, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
And/or validly reverted to its WP:Good article state. Flyer22 ( talk) 03:15, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
Reviewing an early discussion (above) about the title, the article is only in part about the history of swimwear, because male swimwear is only briefly mentioned in four short paragraphs. It is entirely about female swimwear, and slightly more than half of that is specifically about the bikini. The three sections about the history of the swimsuit comprise 18 kB (3002 words), although you could make the argument that the section "Exposed midriff" (3579 B (570 words)) might be about the bikini. It should also be noted that a substantial portion of the section "Pre-20th century" and a smaller portion of "20th century" have been copied from swimwear. The final two sections about the bikini total 21 kB (3492 words). The lede is entirely about the bikini.
The current title and lede are both inaccurate. The contents are neither only about the history of [male and female] swimwear nor about the history of the bikini. I suggest that the article be split into "History of swimwear" and "History of the bikini". This will allow swimwear to more briefly summarize this history section, referring users to the first article that can be expanded to more specifically include men's swimwear, and focus the second article on the specific, cultural icon, the bikini. — btphelps ( talk to me) ( what I've done) 16:58, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Ewawer (Enthusiast), we do not know if the bikini-like clothing in antiquity was used for swimming purposes. What we do know is that some WP:Reliable sources cite this antiquity clothing as "ancient bikinis" or "bikini-like," and suggest that it might have been used for swimming. We should go by the WP:Reliable sources, not our personal opinions, for such article content.
Aditya, when it comes to splitting this article, we should be keeping in mind that WP:SIZE is mainly about readable prose. So when judging the kilobyte size of an article, we should be going on the readable prose, not the references and other things that add to the kilobyte size. When you stated "I see no reason the move the article to the current title", you mean that you prefer the History of the bikini title? Maybe we should take a vote about the article title and whether or not to split this article, and/or where to split some of its content. Either way, I hate to see WP:Good articles deteriorate. Flyer22 ( talk) 00:01, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
User:Ewawer moved the page from History of the bikini to History of swimwear 18 July 2015 without discussing with anyone. A move of this size and scope is a very WP:BOLD move (the policy suggests extra care for Good Articles and above). The appropriate tradition is to follow WP:BRD. I make the change, you revert. I take it to the talk page. We discuss.
Here is my proposal. Please state you position and rationale. And, if you have a different proposal, please, add it as proposal two and so on. Aditya( talk • contribs) 12:42, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
The current article should remain as History of Bikini, the title it had when it was a good article. Because, this article was a comprehensive article on bikini history, and it was a spinout of Bikini, another good article, article (it has two more spionouts - Bikini in popular culture and Bikini variants, which in turn serves as the summary for a whole list of articles from Monokini to Tankini. When reverted, it also should get rid of the material added, irrelevant to bikini, to accommodate the title change. It should essentially revert back to the good article.
The is no need to copy paste from the History section of Swimsuit. It can remain there, until it becomes expanded enough to have its own article (though, I believe, it already is ready to become an article on its own).
Pinging @ Strebe:, @ Flyer22:, @ Btphelps:, @ Ipigott:, and @ Ewawer:. Sorry for the pinging. Aditya( talk • contribs) 12:42, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on History of the bikini. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.articles-central.info/Art/22681/48/Short-History-of-Bikinis-and-Swimsuits.htmlWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:25, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on History of the bikini. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://photos.newhavenregister.com/2013/07/05/photos-on-this-day-july-5-1946-the-first-bikini-goes-on-sale/When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:57, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
The current picture triggered me to wonder what Gilligan's Island might have been like, if there had been a Dennis Hopper–like native islander (a la Apocalypse Now), who is frequently seen running along a beach or a ridge or under heavy canopy in the deep background, and each time this Yeti-like unapproachable apparition is fleetingly perceived wearing ever more of Gilligan's and Ginger's favourite clothing with a wide, chortling, lunatic grin.
Britannica, this ain't. — MaxEnt 20:27, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
You might want to add the reference to the ancient Egyptian Dancing girl who wore what appears to be a bikini bottom. See: /info/en/?search=Dance_in_ancient_Egypt ( Archaeolgoist77 ( talk) 11:51, 25 April 2019 (UTC) )
This is a significant event in bikini history. Public figures weighed in, paid the fine for the team and much discussion about the reason for the rule ensued. The rule was overturned and many teams now wear shorts and athletic top rather than bikinis 2600:1700:CE30:1EE0:6D54:C36F:B5D4:E584 ( talk) 23:31, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
...first test of a nuclear device (nicknamed Able)... was not in Bikini Atoll 80.71.45.68 ( talk) 03:17, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
History of the bikini 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 |
![]() | History of the bikini has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened: |
This is an interesting article but I find the present title rather strange. In its present form, it would seem to refer to the history of the island ( Bikini Atoll) rather than to the article of clothing. I would suggest History of the bikini would be more correct and less confusing. Perhaps you could just move it. - Ipigott ( talk) 17:33, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
As to the title, I propose that the name of the article be changed to "History of swimwear", as it covers and could cover more than history of bikini. Enthusiast ( talk) 02:35, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
The image File:Jaynemansfield4.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
The following images also have this problem:
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 08:44, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
This article uses way too many of them. Will the primary author remove all but those s/he deems most important? Calliopejen1 ( talk) 14:46, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
See File:FourFavorites3101.jpg... AnonMoos ( talk) 11:09, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
According to this edit, the statement that "Bollywood actress Sharmila Tagore struck a memorable moment in 1967 when she appeared in a bikini in An Evening in Paris" is a POV statement. Can that accusation be clarified, please? Otherwise there may be no reason to keep that inline tag. Aditya( talk • contribs) 06:20, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Aditya -- I don't want to get involved in edit warring over this, but that section doesn't really belong on this article (though in a lightly-modified form it might fit on another article)... AnonMoos ( talk) 20:15, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
There was nothing that could really be called an organized feminist movement in 1951, and the title of the reference given refers to ca. 1970, not 1951. AnonMoos ( talk) 17:36, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
They were showgirl performing costumes, not generally swimwear, and were not worn by ordinary respectable women. AnonMoos ( talk) 03:52, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
"Modern Girl Magazine, a fashion magazine from the United States, was quoted in 1957 as saying: "it is hardly necessary to waste words over the so-called bikini since it is inconceivable that any girl with tact and decency would ever wear such a thing" This statement looks dubious to me; it's too convenient to be true. The source for it is only a newspaper article, which mentions it as a bit of a trivia. A Google search for "Modern Girl Magazine" only yields mentions of this alleged statement. I was unable to verify that such a magazine even existed, let alone ever made that statement. Aquila89 ( talk) 20:28, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
Aquila89, I am sure you are right, and that this quote is bogus - I was just going to suggest the same. As someone interested in 1950s design I have collected contemporary fashion magazines for many years. I have never encountered a "Modern Girl Magazine" or found any reference to it except for this quote, which seems to have surfaced about five years ago. I think this is a similar case to the "Housekeeping Monthly Good Wife's Guide" - In other words a journalistic invention. Jellyandjocko ( talk) 23:17, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
The whole section is about swimwears and beachwears, not about bikini at all. Does it really belong here? Maybe we need to move to a more relevant article. Aditya( talk • contribs) 12:17, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
Ewawer (Enthusiast), when adding material to this article, such as this content you added because of what was stated in the #Title of article section above, you should make sure that you are adding sourced material. WP:Reliably sourced. No WP:Dead links, nothing with a Template:Citation needed tag. This is supposed to be a WP:Good article. If it does not remain a WP:Google article, it can be validly subject to WP:Good article reassessment. Flyer22 ( talk) 03:12, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
And/or validly reverted to its WP:Good article state. Flyer22 ( talk) 03:15, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
Reviewing an early discussion (above) about the title, the article is only in part about the history of swimwear, because male swimwear is only briefly mentioned in four short paragraphs. It is entirely about female swimwear, and slightly more than half of that is specifically about the bikini. The three sections about the history of the swimsuit comprise 18 kB (3002 words), although you could make the argument that the section "Exposed midriff" (3579 B (570 words)) might be about the bikini. It should also be noted that a substantial portion of the section "Pre-20th century" and a smaller portion of "20th century" have been copied from swimwear. The final two sections about the bikini total 21 kB (3492 words). The lede is entirely about the bikini.
The current title and lede are both inaccurate. The contents are neither only about the history of [male and female] swimwear nor about the history of the bikini. I suggest that the article be split into "History of swimwear" and "History of the bikini". This will allow swimwear to more briefly summarize this history section, referring users to the first article that can be expanded to more specifically include men's swimwear, and focus the second article on the specific, cultural icon, the bikini. — btphelps ( talk to me) ( what I've done) 16:58, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Ewawer (Enthusiast), we do not know if the bikini-like clothing in antiquity was used for swimming purposes. What we do know is that some WP:Reliable sources cite this antiquity clothing as "ancient bikinis" or "bikini-like," and suggest that it might have been used for swimming. We should go by the WP:Reliable sources, not our personal opinions, for such article content.
Aditya, when it comes to splitting this article, we should be keeping in mind that WP:SIZE is mainly about readable prose. So when judging the kilobyte size of an article, we should be going on the readable prose, not the references and other things that add to the kilobyte size. When you stated "I see no reason the move the article to the current title", you mean that you prefer the History of the bikini title? Maybe we should take a vote about the article title and whether or not to split this article, and/or where to split some of its content. Either way, I hate to see WP:Good articles deteriorate. Flyer22 ( talk) 00:01, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
User:Ewawer moved the page from History of the bikini to History of swimwear 18 July 2015 without discussing with anyone. A move of this size and scope is a very WP:BOLD move (the policy suggests extra care for Good Articles and above). The appropriate tradition is to follow WP:BRD. I make the change, you revert. I take it to the talk page. We discuss.
Here is my proposal. Please state you position and rationale. And, if you have a different proposal, please, add it as proposal two and so on. Aditya( talk • contribs) 12:42, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
The current article should remain as History of Bikini, the title it had when it was a good article. Because, this article was a comprehensive article on bikini history, and it was a spinout of Bikini, another good article, article (it has two more spionouts - Bikini in popular culture and Bikini variants, which in turn serves as the summary for a whole list of articles from Monokini to Tankini. When reverted, it also should get rid of the material added, irrelevant to bikini, to accommodate the title change. It should essentially revert back to the good article.
The is no need to copy paste from the History section of Swimsuit. It can remain there, until it becomes expanded enough to have its own article (though, I believe, it already is ready to become an article on its own).
Pinging @ Strebe:, @ Flyer22:, @ Btphelps:, @ Ipigott:, and @ Ewawer:. Sorry for the pinging. Aditya( talk • contribs) 12:42, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on History of the bikini. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.articles-central.info/Art/22681/48/Short-History-of-Bikinis-and-Swimsuits.htmlWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:25, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on History of the bikini. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://photos.newhavenregister.com/2013/07/05/photos-on-this-day-july-5-1946-the-first-bikini-goes-on-sale/When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:57, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
The current picture triggered me to wonder what Gilligan's Island might have been like, if there had been a Dennis Hopper–like native islander (a la Apocalypse Now), who is frequently seen running along a beach or a ridge or under heavy canopy in the deep background, and each time this Yeti-like unapproachable apparition is fleetingly perceived wearing ever more of Gilligan's and Ginger's favourite clothing with a wide, chortling, lunatic grin.
Britannica, this ain't. — MaxEnt 20:27, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
You might want to add the reference to the ancient Egyptian Dancing girl who wore what appears to be a bikini bottom. See: /info/en/?search=Dance_in_ancient_Egypt ( Archaeolgoist77 ( talk) 11:51, 25 April 2019 (UTC) )
This is a significant event in bikini history. Public figures weighed in, paid the fine for the team and much discussion about the reason for the rule ensued. The rule was overturned and many teams now wear shorts and athletic top rather than bikinis 2600:1700:CE30:1EE0:6D54:C36F:B5D4:E584 ( talk) 23:31, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
...first test of a nuclear device (nicknamed Able)... was not in Bikini Atoll 80.71.45.68 ( talk) 03:17, 24 June 2023 (UTC)