Talk:Narrow cloth

Templating

@ HLHJ I fixed the problems you pointed out on the subject page. Please let me know if it suffices or if it needs more work. I also removed the template. Thanks RV (talk) 05:19, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
— user talk page

Hi, RV, and thanks for putting the work in. In the old version, I templated for expert attention on grounds that "a coherent account of when and where the various definitions mentioned apply is needed". I could have made that clearer, apologies. I was talking about the legal definitions of the maximum measured width that was considered narrow-loom cloth. I thought it might be appropriate to have a section on those near the end of the article, adding in as many legal definitions as possible, and clearly indicating when and where they were used. The current article gives two definitions, <29 inches and <39 inches, but prioritizes one of them as though only one of them was correct. It also omits the <36-inch definition found in the older version. I think we should explicitly contrast these definitions in a later section. It would also be good to globalize a bit, if there are legal definitions of the maximum width of tanmono etc..

I think the qualitative definition (cloth a single weaver can span) is most important, because it is global and explains why, historically, folk and cheaper textiles were narrow-loomed, and why the distinction all but vanished with the invention of the flying shuttle. So I think that info belongs in the lede. I used the still image of the weaver spanning his loom as the lede image (which comes up alone in search results), because I think the still of the video is not as clear an illustration of the concept, especially with a big "play" symbol overlain on it.

I think the article should retain the link to broadcloth, and if reliable sources attest the use of that term as an antonym to narrow-loom cloth, that article should mention it. That article is about fulled blind-faced cloth. A separate article on unfulled broadcloth might be suitable if sources exist. I think retaining a link to alnage would also be useful.

A section on the persistence of narrow-loom cloth in artisanal weaving and traditional textiles would be a great addition. It could improve and expand on the "Types" section. We could also mention traditional articles made from narrow-loom cloth (pretty much all traditional folk garments, norens, and so on).

I'm afraid I don't understand some of the current version ("was famous as like broadcloths"? why the square brackets?). I'll come back to this later and have a look through the sources and try to understand it. Again, thank you for the effort you've put into making this article. HLHJ (talk) 18:17, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

I appreciate your time and suggestions. I have made changes accordingly. Thanks RV (talk) 15:57, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, I made some more changes and tagged the bits I don't understand. I think I found a better lede imge, too. HLHJ (talk) 00:23, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Yokohama Silk Museum 020.JPG

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:55, 8 May 2023 (UTC)