Talk:Necktie

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article Necktie was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
WikiProject Fashion (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fashion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fashion on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Untitled[edit]

The old stuff is in Talk:Necktie/Archive 1

Women and Boys[edit]

This page makes no mention at all of tie use by youths or females, yet does not clearly state that it only covers use by adult men. I know that females have been know to wear ties, if only in the punk scene (Avril Lavigne was wearing them at her concerts.) and any boy old enough to walk is dressed in a little suit complete with tie for formal occasions (in America). Could this page mention these issues?

IsaacSapphire (talk) 22:12, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I added a tiny section on women and ties, and I even found a reference for it. I'll add more as I find it.

--IsaacSapphire (talk) 00:09, 29 March 2008 (UTC)to

If the article makes no reference to adult men, why would you need to specify women and boys? Also, Avril Lavigne is pop, not punk. 2crudedudes (talk) 14:32, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Croats v. Hrvatska[edit]

What is the opinion of the general populace on replacing the word derivation for cravat from the word "Croats" to Hrvatska, the Croatian word for Croatia? I believe I'm right in saying this is where the word comes from, not the anglicized name for the country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prostudioetlabore (talkcontribs) 19:12, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Croatian Origin? Maybe for the word, not the article...[edit]

The word 'Cravat' may have an origin in French reference to Croatia, but the article definitely predates the early Seventeenth Century - at least from the Quin Dynasty Terracotta Army onwards. I found a detailed and fascinating article on the history of neckwear at http://fly.hiwaay.net/~jimes/necktie/spatHistory.html (which I have yet to factcheck, but the Terracotta Army mention is bang on) This included a Fourteenth Century French quote referring to a cravat ("French courtly poet Eustache Deschamps celebrated dressing to kill in 1380 with the immortal line "faites restraindre sa cravate" (pull his cravat tighter)") as well as more non-Eurocentric history of the wearing of masculine neckcloths. This was in the 'necktie repository' at the necktie repository http://fly.hiwaay.net/~jimes/necktie/ though also reposted at http://flatrock.org.nz/topics/intellect_and_entertain/a_loosening_of_ties.htm The author is apparently Willy J. Spat but I think it is actually compiled from another article by Spat (unless by a relative of similar name) as towards the end of the article it quotes "organizational consultant Dr William J. Spat" and may well be taken from a print edition. —Preceding unsigned comment added by a_llusive (talkcontribs) 09:26, 24 February 2012 (BST)

Clip-On Tie[edit]

I recommend that the Clip-On ties section should have a page of its own, as i can put a link to it on here and include some pictures of them on its own individual page, and go into great detail about them, If you dont argee please tell me on here or on my talk page, User:Dep. Garcia Thanks

Dep. Garcia 10:10, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Please will someone discuss this with me as the sooner I now, the sooner I will be able to do something! Or check out my User Talk page to discuss it there instead User:Dep. Garcia

Dep. Garcia 16:12, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I think I'd say there's not currently enough information to justify a separate page. That assessment is obviously contingent on how much info there is, and subject to change. ENeville 22:08, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Suppose, but what about a picture? Dep. Garcia 10:28, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
I think a picture or diagram would be valuable, particularly if it showed how the clip affixes the tie. ENeville 18:54, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
I see you've got one in Clip-on tie. I think that's a good one. ENeville 23:58, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
It shows the clip used to fasten to the shirt, ENeville what do you think of the article Clip-on ties that I made?? Dep. Garcia 17:46, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Standing Challenge: External links: How to tie a tie[edit]

Any time someone adds something to this section (ie. the "How to tie a tie" section mentioned in the headline), unless it is:

  1. Obviously superior to what we have now, or
  2. Someone posts a word of explanation here

...then it should be removed post-haste. Those who post a word of explanation here should have their link left for a week while we discuss why their link deserves to be added.

We've had piles of links to essentially the same material posted here in the past, much of which was probably sites wanting to increase their PageRank. We've managed to cull it down to just the most useful stuff, and we want to keep it that way.

Also, if you *are* adding links, when describing the diagrams/tips, ensure that your description of "good" matches that used on the site already; if you're unsure, have a look at the already-described links, and see how they compare.

And now, your space to explain your link:

  • Referencing my previous statements (in "Further" below), I happened to find a markedly superior site: apparently non-commercial, decent directions, a fairly thorough approach, and a second language to boot. I stuck it in the heirarchy of external links. This is less than ideal, and but at somepoint all the how-to links will need to vetted for usefulness/accuracy and the whole mess sorted out. In the meantime I wanted to distinguish totieatie.com from the schlock. ENeville 16:35, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
  • NOTE: I have just added tieguys.com to how to tie and history, they are one of the oldest and most respetced tie sources on the net, I have used them before and if you check the age of their site and material one would see they are most likely the originators of the material out there just my .02 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by EinsteinEdits (talkcontribs) 17:35, 4 October 2006 (UTC).
  • ALSO i noticed you have allowed and kept a site that's a MFA made for google adsense
http://www.1st-in-how-to-tie-a-tie.com/
give me a break guys —The preceding unsigned comment was added by EinsteinEdits (talkcontribs) 23:59, 1 April, 2006 (UTC).
  • I just added a page by the author of the book The 85 Ways to Tie a Tie, which is the definitive book on tie knots. It includes the two mathematics papers on which the book is based, in pdf format. Plus it lists all the known tie knots, their number, their size, and their names. As well as a comprehnsive bibliography on ties and tie knots, plus standard knot tables. Superior to the link to html vs of the Nature paper. :http://www.tcm.phy.cam.ac.uk/~tmf20/85ways.html
  • I see my edit from 5 minutes ago, from the first site on the internet to offer this 'History of neckties' content circa 1997 (SEE: http://web.archive.org/web/19971224213045/http://tieguys.com/information/history.shtml) thats copied everywhere, has been edited to be from one of the copied sites. I feel links should be going out to original content providers vs. sites copying their content - but whatever, if thats how you guys want to run this place... Hand out your links to copy and paste site copiers... that make money off of advertising links (banner ads in this case) seems alot worse than giving the link to a commercial entity that was the original provider of the content. Maybe it's just me, but I can't image everyone here supports sites that rip off others then throw in their ad links....—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.119.102.22 (talkcontribs) 02:35, 30 November 2006.
Give credit where credit is due... Allan Flusser, source and the author of Style and the Man (1996)[1], from whom it was taken from. Other comercial sites [2] at least give credit. The replaced link is some old guy's personal website, and the "banner ads" are of the hosting company. If anything the tieguys were the first to rip him off for commercial purposes in 1997. Hu12 03:33, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
I feel that Allan Flusser's work is not cited, and at the very least a copyright violation in the Cravat section. It is taken verbatim from his book, and cited on http://www.how-to-tie-a-neck-tie.com/necktiehist.htm . I don't know if it is used by permission. [BugCrusher] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bugcrusher (talkcontribs) 05:35, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Culling how-to links[edit]

Hi all. It was suggested above that we cull some of the links about how to tie a tie. As a precursor to this, I have:

  1. Categorised all external references
  2. Put the numerous "How to tie a tie" links in a table, with some information for comparison purposes

Many of the other external links also cover how to tie a tie, but that's not why we have them, so I haven't put them in the table.

There's a link that's entirely in Russian, which was added by an IP address (presumably someone with no Wikipedia account). Unless someone can give me a good reason why it should stay here, I'll get rid of it.

What I think we want to achieve is:

  • Explain how to tie the knots in as useful a fashion as possible
  • Explain as many different knots as possible

For this reason, I'd expect that we'd keep all the ones with entries in the "Other Knots" column.

I also need to go through sometime and rate each page for ease-of-use (easy, medium, hard), and then we'll see how we go. TimNelson

Wow, lots of work there. Well done. - PKM 17:13, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Part II[edit]

Ok, all categorised by how good the instructions are. The Russian link is gone. Unless someone complains, I'll get rid of the last two links in the table, as they don't have anything that the others don't, AFAICT. TimNelson 03:00, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Part III[edit]

Ok, got rid of them, and an extra one that someone had added that wasn't useful. I'll put a standing challenge at the top of the page, since this seems to be an ongoing problem.

Further[edit]

I apologize if presumptuous or unschooled in posting standards on this issue, but the instructions in these links are extremely poor. I've taken the trouble to go through the Fink-Mao link fairly thoroughly and have a pretty good understanding of necktie knotting at this point, and I still have difficulty following many of the directions linked here because they are so often confusing. The "cross" knot directions seem to arbritrarily reverse right & left of the conceptual model compared to the other instructions on that site, and many of the directions on the site credited with the most knots appear to be simply redundant, e.g. "simple" and "Italian" or "English" and "Windsor". Additionally, I believe that some of the instructions are erroneous, depending on one's standards. I would hate to be trying to learn how to tie a tie from one of these sites.

BTW, I've looked at a few other sites on the web, which often have fetching photos or diagrams, but have regularly found distinct errors in instruction. I think good references are hard to find on this subject. ENeville 18:52, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Verifiable knots[edit]

Only verifiably used knots should be included in the article, based on WP:V. By extension, external links that explain tying unverified knots should be culled, particularly if commercial. This may me be a little harsh for culturally variable issues like clothing knots, but seems necessary when commercial sites are evidently padding their knot instructions for sake of attention. ENeville 18:27, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

External links organization[edit]

Currently, "External links" has subcategories for history, care, etc. There's so much crossover in the types of pages linked, however, that links keep getting multiply listed. I think this section should be reorganized more conventionally, with a list of links followed by one-line descriptions. Also, with knot-tying methods being deprecated by redundancy in individual articles (eg Windsor knot), as well as the impinging argument that they verge on howto's (WP:NOT), external links included just for their tying methods are arguably misplaced in this article. ENeville 18:52, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Tie Variants[edit]

String ties[edit]

Saw no mention of these here; are they in a different category of neckwear. I don't think they're the same origin, and maybe were frontier-origin only; maybe an adaption of the velvet-ribbon-tie using cord instead, with a clasp to hold it together?Skookum1 00:19, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Right there under Necktie#Tie variants. It was labeled as Bola tie (it's real name), and string tie was at the end of its description in regularly formatted text, so i can see why it'd be easy to miss. I changed it so now it reads Bola tie (also called a string tie); a varation blah blah blah blah. --jfg284 you were saying? 11:47, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

COWBOY TIES???`[edit]

what about those ties you see in westerns? i love those, what are they called? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RevSavitar (talkcontribs).

Bola tie (sometimes, "shoestring necktie").
Atlant 14:20, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Kipper Tie[edit]

The BBC mentioned the Kipper Tie in a recent article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4735270.stm). If anybody knows what that is, could they add it in? Thanks!

Google is your friend. http://www.phrases.org.uk/bulletin_board/32/messages/147.html If anyone wants to write up the info, that could be useful. TimNelson

Wooden and Novelty Ties[edit]

I deleted most of the latest edit from an anonymous editor, about "Wooden Ties". I Googled "Wooden Tie Club" and "Marcus Waring" and found nothing. I did find some sites that sold or showed images of wooden ties, so I left that part of the edit. Should there be a separate section for novelty ties? Boneyard90 (talk) 15:02, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Not for wooden ties.   Racconish Tk 17:38, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Not JUST for wooden ties, no. I should have mentioned in the same paragraph of the Necktie article, there were several examples of novelty ties, and I wonder if that style shouldn't get a section of it own as a part of the larger "variations and styles" topic. Boneyard90 (talk) 00:46, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Novelty ties already mentioned as patterns in the four-in-hand section, with mistakes: the fashion did not start in the 1980s , it is cyclical, and we are now at the end of a cycle, therefore should not give the topic undue weight. I would keep the term 'novelty' for the fashion of the 50s and use 'conversational' for the ties of the 80s such as those of Miller (cf. Chaille).   Racconish Tk 07:05, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Ah, keeping it chronological rather than topical. Since nobody else has weighed in with an opinion, that recommendation sounds fine with me. I may do some re-wording and cleanup then. Thanks for the input. Boneyard90 (talk) 15:59, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Knots[edit]

"Doube Windsor"[edit]

Removed "Double Windsor" and associated external link. I believe that "Double Windsor" is used erroneously for the Windsor, referencing it's being about twice as much knotting as the half-Windsor. When I've observed this term used, I've come to find that those using it have very limited sartorial knotting knowledge, often only tying the half-Windsor themselves. The removed link, in fact, is actually instructions on tying a variant of the half-Windsor, despite claiming to create the "Double Windsor". I have never, in real life or in online research, seen a knot or directions for such that would even approximate a double knotting of the Windsor itself.ENeville 14:21, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

More than 85[edit]

You'll probably want to mention this when it is published: http://arxiv.org/abs/1401.8242 Paradoctor (talk) 17:34, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Good/Bad article status[edit]

Nice article[edit]

I've nominated it as a good article. SilkTork 12:14, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I'd like to pass this article really, but I don't know what to do about the Manual of Style thing, could anyone familiar with this article perhaps expand the introduction to somehow incorprate a sentence or two about some of the sections not mentioned in the intro, they seem important. Homestarmy 18:31, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Good Article Status[edit]

After reviewing, I felt the article's only issues were a) the double use of the school-tie photo and b) the somewhat garbled citation area. I copied a new pic from the Commons, and researched each citation and put in in Wiki Cite format. I did not think either constituted a significant edit, so I promoted it to Good Article status. Good job, y'all. -- Avi 18:23, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup[edit]

This article needs cleanup because of the disorganization of the different kinds of knots and how to make them along with their history. Good article status should be questioned. --70.111.218.254 00:04, 14 December 2006 (UTC)



I'll agree it's a pretty good article, but this sentence is the most poorly written I've read in ages:

Following its resurgence in the 1980s, in the 1990s, Internet-based (i.e. dot-com) companies, most of whose workers did not so dress when dealing with clients, since said business's public image solely was the website rather than personal meetings.

What did the Internet-based companies do? May I suggest:

Following its resurgence in the 1980s, the necktie fell again into decline in the 1990s due to the popular rise of new Internet-based companies, whose workforce relied less and less upon direct personal contact with their clients.

--80.57.99.220 16:52, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

In the bottom of the section "Ties as signs of membership", I'm not sure if this sentence is grammatically correct:

Sometimes, both types are used by an organisation, either simply to offer a choice or to indicate a distinction among and levels of membership.

What does "among and levels" mean? --Chimin 07 (talk) 04:39, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

In the section "1920s - present day", what is 'GIs' in the sentence

This was the beginning of what was later labeled the "Bold Look;" ties which reflected the returning GIs' desire to break with wartime uniformity.

This sentence was added in oldid=263992744. Chimin 07 (talk) 07:26, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Citing sources[edit]

I created a "Note" section in the article to accommodate the explanatory notes in the section "Six- and seven-fold ties."
See WP:REFGROUP for where I adopted the format. I'm not skilled in creating references, so I was just being bold.
Chimin 07 (talk) 08:47, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Misc[edit]

Formal?[edit]

The article says that a necktie is used as formal wear, which is clearly wrong. A tie is semi-formal; formal wear requires a bow tie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.154.227.159 (talk) 23:04, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

6 and 7 fold ties[edit]

"A seven-fold tie is an unlined construction". This is not true. A 7 fold tie can be lined. I know for a fact that Attolini made some.

"A seven fold tie is constructed completely out of silk. It is cut from a single piece of silk". This is also not true. It is often the case but not if it's a lined 7 fold.

"A six-fold tie [...] is self tipped." Not necessarily self-tipped...

6 and 7 fold ties are defined by one thing only, the number of folds, regardless of whether it is lined, unlined or self tipped. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.162.181.34 (talk) 15:16, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Tying a necktie[edit]

Is anyone else finding tying a necktie an incredible pain in the butt? I generally take at least half an hour to get even the simplest knot to look right and not wrinkle up entirely. Even the smallest mistake and I have to start from scratch. I find it horrifying that men in executive positions have to do this every morning. Neckties must have been invented by a woman to get revenge on men. JIP | Talk 17:07, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

No - when you've had to wear a tie to school every day for the last 10+ years like me, you get used to it. Of course, you don't have to tie it everyday - you can just loosen the knot and pull it up again when you want to wear it again. - THE GREAT GAVINI {T-C} 20:57, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
I used to suffer a lot from having to tie a necktie. But it really becomes easier with practice. Also, try to use the small knot for starters; it is a nice knot that really deserves more recognition, and way easier to tie and to understand than the more popular four-in-hand. Luis Dantas 18:24, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

How about some Instructions?[edit]

This article could include the instructions to make the different Knots.--201 00:29, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Technically, that's against Wikipedia guidelines (WP:NOT). That's why there's Wikibooks (linked right). However, I think that there may be some descriptions of knots in articles on those knots (eg Windsor knot). ENeville 01:26, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Which part of WP:NOT you mean? If that's really against guidelines, some less specific references about how to make some type of Knots could be made in order to differenciate them. Don't you think?--201 23:07, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

If you need instructions, I suggest you try WikiHow. Seal of the President of the United States.svgPresident George W. Bushcarrot (Talk with the President!) My past battles. 18:44, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

External Links[edit]

Added two links:

  • one dealing with Croat Cavalry origin of Cravatte;
  • the other dealing with the etymology of the word cravatte and it's adoption in different languages.

iruka 16:46, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

  • how to tie a necktie instructions (main methods) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Majorson (talkcontribs) 09:32, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
I won't remove them unless other feel they are inapropriate, but please discuss links on the talk page first for consensus among other editors. This page has been a target for spammed in the recent past, and is being watched closely. thanks for your contribution.--Hu12 16:58, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Ok - didn't know about the spamming issue. cheers, iruka 03:09, 17 December 2006 (UTC)


Suggested link to add:

http://demonstrations.wolfram.com/YourFavoriteNecktie/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.52.172.56 (talk) 16:26, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

How-to links and Wikibooks[edit]

Hi all. As the person who did the original culling of the spammy how-to links, I have a suggestion. How about we remove all the how-to links, and just refer people to the Wikibooks project; we could even move the existing links there. My point is, this will simplify things even more. My original intent in cleaning up the links was to make it possible for someone just coming to the page to find out quickly how to tie a tie, whether they wanted a standard knot, or something unusual.

I guess I'm just glad that there's (hopefully) going to be one central location where these queries can now be directed (since, as someone has noted, Wikipedia is not the place for it).

What say ye all? -- TimNelson 09:33, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

What about the craft of making ties? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bentshoe (talkcontribs) 23:53, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Cravat[edit]

I wonder if more cannot be said about the Cravat as a "neck adornment". As a graduate from a culinary school which required students and teachers alike to wear the traditional culinary cravat, I know that more could be said about this particular form of the "necktie" and question whether it should be lumped into the "necktie" article" Crocadillion 17:09, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I think adding the information is a good idea, but I think it belongs on the Cravat page instead. Of course, that page needs to be divided into different sections with headings, so maybe you could do that too.
-- TimNelson 09:03, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
This is quite dubious proposal. All the languages in the world do not make distinction between a necktie and a cravat. Basically it was the same in English until 1850ies when in English it happened to be easier to say a tie instead of "cravat". Therefore, there is no difference between a necktie and a cravat today in any language but english and all languages (including arabic or african ones) use only cravat or local adaptation (German Krawatte, Italian Cravata, Spanish Corbata, Croatian Kravata etc. There are also many proponents of abbandoning the word tie or necktie as it was created from the form "to tie a cravat" or later just "tie". So, I don't quie understand in the article that there is a distinction between a cravat (being a historical garnment) and a tie (being modern). Even in English the word cravat is sometimes used for the modern piece of clothing.Hammer of Habsburg (talk) 22:47, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

In German we say Schlips and Krawatte. So not only a local adaptation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.245.147.81 (talk) 13:07, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Jean Patou[edit]

Was Jean Patou the first designer tie maker? Does anyone have references? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.34.231.236 (talk) 06:10, 16 April 2007 (UTC).

Tie stripe directions[edit]

I learned about the difference between American and European/Commonwealth stripe styles from the web. A citation would be very desirable to confirm the statements about stripe direction. Also a photograph comapring the two styles should be added. hajhouse 21:07, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Phallic symbol?[edit]

Is a necktie considered a phallic symbol?

maybe to suggest a large flaccid member--but in the age of Viagra, shouldn't people be putting lots of starch in their ties?01:45, 3 March 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.100.34.125 (talk)
Neckties are indeed considered a phallic symbol. I will be adding a note about the `Weiberfastnacht' festival in Germany. During Weiberfastnacht women cut off men's ties as a symbol of castration. Centrepull (talk) 23:38, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Help! Can someone tidy the reference for phallic symbolism? I'm having trouble with the formatting, not the information. Currently Ref No. 7. Thanks (BTW, if you don't like that reference source for any reason, you can find plenty of others referencing the necktie as a phallic symbol by means of a quick google, Alison Lurie's writings etc.) 86.170.78.146 (talk) 00:21, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Deleted Material[edit]

I deleted the nonsense about being wary of wearing striped ties in Britain, I have several patterned ties and I've never been accused of wearing a tie that I'm not entitled to wear, this was clearly written by an American who has seen the episode of Have I Got News for You where Paul Merton wore a Garrick club tie (and, incidentally was later banned from becming a member of the club) there are many cultural differences and misunderstandings between our two countries, if only we'd stayed in 1776, it would have been a better world (fewer dead Vietnamise for a start!)-GeorgeFormby1—Preceding unsigned comment added by GeorgeFormby1 (talkcontribs)

History[edit]

Origin?[edit]

It looks like someone was kidding when he wrote the "Origin" section about neckties being a way to hold one's head on, etc. Does someone have real info to put in that section?209.6.248.221 05:25, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I think that paragraph should be totally rewritten; holding one's head on? Man necklace? Electricaltape 20:02, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

It came from Croatia, see this. Adriaan90 ( TalkContribs ) ♪♫ 21:00, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
i've gone ahead and removed it, for obvious reasons. the former text is below. --heah 17:53, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Oddly enough, ties developed independently at two different points in history.

In Hungary in the early 4th century, ties were created to solve the problem of holding ones head on. In the Amazon rain forest, sometime prior to European penetration, ties were designed by jealous male warriors as "man-necklaces".

Military scarves are no neckties[edit]

Military scarves, like the ones commonly worn by Roman legionaries or Han Chinese soldiers were NO ties, but, surprise, scarves. Their function was to prevented the armour rubbing at the neck, and not meant for personal adornment. Actually, the Han Chinese scarves do not even look remotely like cravats (= Croats), unless one is prepared to blur every line of distinction. That a suit is today universaly called in China "Western suit" should ring a bell for those who believe in any Chinese origin or precedence. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 03:18, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Four-way tie[edit]

I have been told that a Lochaber shop-keeper sold a four-way tie for many years. This had a different colour / pattern on each side and each half of the tie so there were four possible colours / patterns that could be worn. I have been searching around to see if I can find any reference to this but not been successful so far. Has anyone come across these? --jmb (talk) 13:43, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Counter Culture[edit]

perhaps a mention on how the neck tie is worn sarcastically amongst counter-culture groups? Punk musical groups have worn the tie as an anti-corporate/anti-establishment symbol. not sure how this fits in to the current layout or if it even worth mentioning, but thought I'd throw it out there.

GA Sweeps Review: Delisted[edit]

Symbol unsupport vote.svg In order to uphold the quality of Wikipedia:Good articles, all articles listed as Good articles are being reviewed against the requirements of the GA criteria as part of the GA project quality task force. I am specifically going over all of the "Culture and society" articles. Unfortunately, as of June 14, 2008, this article fails to satisfy the criteria. The article was passed as a GA back in 2006, and since then, the criteria have changed significantly. The article currently lacks inline citations for several statistics and statements that should have them. If you can find sources online, feel free to include those, although book sources are always great. The following are several issues that should be addressed before renominating the article at WP:GAN:

  1. Expand the lead to better summarize the article. See WP:LEAD for guidelines.
  2. Address all [citation needed] tags. Use online and book sources to help cite the information within the article. Also source any statements you think that may be questioned by a reader over its verifiability.
  3. Address the "This section does not cite any references or sources. (November 2007)" and "The examples and perspective in this article or section may not represent a worldwide view of the subject." tags.

For these reasons, the article has been delisted from WP:GA. However, if improvements are made bringing the article up to standards, the article may be nominated at WP:GAN. If you disagree with this review, you can seek an alternate opinion at Good Article reassessment. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have updated the article's history to reflect this review. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 02:41, 15 June 2008 (UTC)


Peanuting[edit]

In the UK school pupils are often pranked by having their tie pulled at the front so that it tightens, this is called peanuting, I don't know why. In most secondary schools people wear ties and mostof these people have fat knots and short ties so people pull them so they're tight. I believe this should be added. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jlb95jet (talkcontribs) 15:11, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Does not represent a world view[edit]

I am sorry but "american knot"? It can only be a joke.

Picture of the tie: Why is it loosened?[edit]

Is there some reason that the main image of a tie shows one that's been loosened (with the shirt unbuttoned) instead of one tied normally? Does anyone have a good picture of a normally tied tie? Jeff Muscato (talk) 05:46, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree. The picture for this page should be a tie worn with the shirt buttoned and tie tightened. --24.178.234.81 (talk) 04:08, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Links to how to tie a tie.[edit]

I added a link to the BEST video on how to tie a tie online. This video has been watched over 3/4th a million times and has had an overwhelmingly good response to it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.179.77.6 (talk) 03:01, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

New external link[edit]

I think we should add a new external link to show how to tie a tie : i suggest this one : *[http ://www.tie-knot.eu 9 different tie knot] How to tie a tie We can also add it in the "tie a tie" section. What do you think about it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.77.225.130 (talk) 17:18, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

First its a blog, and the domain you posted has no content except the Iframe ripoff of a-la-louche.typepad.fr/tie_knot Adsense pub-0734870285314814 --Hu12 (talk) 19:30, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Ok,

And what do you think about this link : The largest choice of videos of 9 differents tie knots? But it's in French.

Masonic origins of Neckies and the ban in Iran[edit]

I was told that the Ayatollahs in Iran erroneously thought the necktie was a symbol of the cross, but others have asserted that it was banned because of its Masonic origin (two triangles). I can find very little on the `masonic origins' of the necktie but if there was a link, the dates would fit. --Wool Bridge (talk) 22:40, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Inlcude a link of a video, about how to tie a tieknot[edit]

I think can be useful to display a link to a video where people can learn how to tie a necktie

Like: * Video that shows quite well how to do a tie knot —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manutena (talkcontribs) 00:57, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Link at Dmoz already has videos. Racconish Tk 11:08, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

I also agree that we need links to videos, and I agree that we need them on this page and not just a list of them on other pages. However, I think that the quality of the video is important. That is why I posted a link to this video. Read the user comments and you will find that almost everyone who watches this video is helped by it.

This is spam. Racconish Tk 16:23, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

How is it SPAM! I guarantee my video is easier to follow and more highly rated than the one that is currently posted. I am going to post it again and await for your follow up comments.99.179.77.92 (talk) 02:51, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

That truly is a great how to tie a tie video, just look at the viewer comments. I vote to keep the highly rated how to tie a tie video.Bbuie (talk) 06:19, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

This link is non acceptable SPAM. It has a banner plastered accross with a link for mynicetie.com ; it says clearly it is sponsored by mynicetie.com ; it starts and ends with 20 seconds of promotion for mynicetie.com ; in a nutshell, this is precisely the kind of video link which is not allowed on WP as indicated here.
Also, links to Youtube are generally not accepted on WP as indicated here: despite the claim by an IP editor it is "his" video, which may raise an issue of COI with the website it links to, there is a copyright infringement.
The "high rating"on Youtube does not qualify it as a reliable source for WP, particularly if it is a copyright infringing spam.
The addition of this link seems to be the sole contribution to WP of this IP editor and has been already reverted many times.
Finally, the double windsor knot is not the most widespread and the way it is tied on the video is questionable.   Racconish Tk 19:49, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Racconish, a few comments:

Wikipedia Rules says, "There is no blanket ban on linking to YouTube or other user-submitted video sites, as long as the links abide by the guidelines on this page (see Restrictions on linking and Links normally to be avoided)." I have found that this video does not violate any copyrights. I could see you argue that this link is mainly to promote a website, but I see it as an introduction, not an advertisement.
Read the user comments, this is a very helpful video if not one of the most. A video will greatly enhance the Necktie page and make it easier for users to learn how to tie one. I vote that we include several links to the best videos. If you want to vote on a better one, I would love to re-evaluate the links.

Bbuie (talk) 05:11, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

"No better video" is not a reason to accept spam ! The anonymous "votes" on Youtube are not a criterium for inclusion in Wikipedia, as they do not establish reliability. The video on Youtube is "clearly intended to promote a website". There is no discussion it does NOT abide the guidelines of WP:ELNO. Here, here and here are more reliable videos on the windsor and double windsor knot.   Racconish Tk 05:55, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

necktie as a symbol of wage slavery[edit]

"Neckties are viewed by various sub- and counter-culture movements as being a symbol of submission and slavery (i.e. having a symbolic chain around one's neck) to the corrupt elite of society, as a 'wage slave'.[19]"

I propose that we add these words: "despite the fact that the necktie is also worn by the elites, in fact, at a greater frequency".--69.121.51.151 (talk) 16:17, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

If you're going to say "fact" you need a reference. Perhaps: "despite the same trend among members of management status." Boneyard90 (talk) 16:44, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Came across an interesting American-made four-in-hand convenience tie that had substantial American market...[edit]

…from the 1930's to 1960's, and am adding a referenced paragraph in an appropriate place. Intent is just to add new material, not remove. Note, my interest is not as a specialist here, but the sources are a reputable monograph series and patents, and the design and endurance of the tie (1935-1960 or so) are noteworthy enough that I'm giving it a mention. (Will add the related business references later, as time permits.) Cheers. LeProf Leprof 7272 (talk) 03:07, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Note, I have kept as much of the earlier clip-on paragraph as I could, indicating earlier un-referenced material with citation-needed tags. There is one sentence I could not leave in without a citation (however I might agree with it), because it indicates a clear opinion/judgment that demands sourcing:
  • "This 20th-century innovation is considered stylistically inferior or juvenile,"
Can the editor supplying this sentence please provide its source, and return it to the paragraph as they see fit? Thank you. Leprof 7272 (talk) 05:05, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
One further phrase removed until a citation can be provided:
  • "and other fields in which the wearer could be held "leashed" by an assailant."
This done both because it indicates a quoted word/idea without attribution, and because the section overstates one area of safety concern without mentioning a predominant one, the widely noted risk of wearing loose clothing items in operating equipment (citation added). Add back this phrase, with citation, when convenient, cheers. Leprof 7272 (talk) 05:12, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Please note, re: edited clip-on section (preceding talk section)[edit]

After looking at the article with fresh eyes, I think some of the material that appears here could be moved to the main "clip-on tie" article. When this is done, this section can be condensed. This will take a bit of time, because of the work needed at that separate, less well-developed article, and for reasons of personal schedule. I also am loathe to remove all the new citation-rich material, leaving only "citation needed" sentences. Please be patient and leave the new in material here, until other editors can add their citations, and until that "receiving article" can be readied for new material. Thank you. Leprof 7272 (talk) 15:01, 27 February 2014 (UTC)