Talk:Fedora

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Fashion (Rated Start-class, Mid-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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

M'lady[edit]

Fedora's have become an object of ridicule in many sectors of Western society. This is significant and it's surprising that there is no mention of this in the article. Please read this article and perhaps some new information could be added. Crazy Eddy (talk) 13:41, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Not really what would be accepted as a wp:reliable source here. - DVdm (talk) 14:48, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Agreed. Tutelary (talk) 14:57, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
How about these? Crazy Eddy (talk) 11:00, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
If you find a well-quoted scholarly sociologist who says—using sources such as these—that Fedora's have become an object of ridicule in many sectors of Western society, then surely you're in business. Otherwise (I think) this is just wp:SYNTH based on some (weak) wp:primary sources. - DVdm (talk) 11:21, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
Sounds like we've got a fedora wearer here. Ah well, maybe Wikipedia will catch up one day. Crazy Eddy (talk) 12:11, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
I'd never put something that silly on my head Face-smile.svg. - DVdm (talk) 12:33, 20 June 2014 (UTC)


I think this could be the scholarly article you were looking for, good gentlesirs. https://www.academia.edu/5101822/Fedora_Shaming_as_Discursive_Activism — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.136.46.253 (talk) 14:52, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

This is better, most previous sources were sensationalist click-bait articles from the likes of Buzzfeed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.39.188.119 (talk) 15:31, 1 November 2014 (UTC) wh
There is no such thing, it is just a couple of whiny people who have created a strawman of everyone they hate. And "fedora shaming" isn't consistent. MRAs call male feminists fedora wearing white knights and feminists call male MRAs fedora wearing nice guys. Whoever you hate, there is a fedora wearing stereotype for you. The only consistency is that the stereotype is usually applied against men but not always. Andrea Carter (at your service | my good deeds) 20:58, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
Ok, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't include it, right? --31.49.114.250 (talk) 19:03, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
That's a good point, but I still think it's notable. If you don't like it that's completely fine, but I believe that it's still notable. 109.156.219.61 (talk) 16:10, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Still not good enough, apparently. This article is clearly being patrolled by fedora-donners. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrEpsilon (talkcontribs) 16:09, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

I don't think some stupid meme should be mentioned in this article. This is the hat of Michael Jackson, not the hat of a mystical MRA atheist neckbeard anti-SRS living with his mom. Andrea Carter (at your service | my good deeds) 20:45, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

What has it being 'stupid' got to do with anything? --31.49.114.250 (talk) 19:02, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia has articles about many less popular and widespread "stupid memes". The fedora is now a major Internet symbol for men's rights activists and such. Equinox (talk) 17:42, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Seconded 109.156.219.61 (talk) 16:06, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
One:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Two, provide reliable sources to show how it's "a major Internet symbol". JDDJS (talk) 22:43, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
I don't really care whether the article covers this or not! I was just overturning the fallacious "it can't be included because it's a stupid meme" argument. HTH. Equinox (talk) 05:21, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia's bias against internet culture is notorious. And they're seemingly oblivious to the irony of that. This meme has been UBIQUITOUS for YEARS, but because it's all OTI rather than in nearly dead print or television media, it might as well not exist. 73.114.151.90 (talk) 19:39, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for sharing. Wikipedia is based on reliable sources, whether in print or online. Feel free to add other material to your blog. - SummerPhDv2.0 22:56, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Serious work needed on lead[edit]

The lead paragraph should describe the hat. As it is, the opening sentence reads "A fedora is mostly associated with a felt hat, they can be made of wool, cashmere, rabbit or beaverfelt not often today from nutriafelt, these felts can also blended to each other also with mink or chinchilla and rarely with vicuña, guanaco, cervelt. or mohair."

It's a real platypus of a sentence, that probably belongs (rewritten) in a later section ("materials"?).

The second paragraph opens "Fedoras have a wide brim, smaller sized brim hats called trilby and with indented crown." What?

I would try to fix it, but since it is very hard to tell what a fedora actually is from this article, I'm afraid I might much it up. Huw Powell (talk) 02:53, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out. Looking at the history I see there was large number of recent edits, by someone whose English obviously was not fluent. I restored most of the old lead, leaving many of the recent additions, but I deleted some sentences I could not understand or that seemed to apply to felt hats in general and not specifically to fedoras. The lead section could still be improved: it currently has to much detail for a lead section. Indefatigable (talk) 01:35, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Atheist / Gamer culture / Misogynists / MRAs[edit]

Fedoras have a vastly different significance online than anything mentioned in this article. Fedoras are often associated with belligerent forms of atheism or the less savory parts of gamer culture and Men's Rights Activists. Mostly because both of those subcultures are, at least in part, populated by misogynists. So called "nice guys" who complain that women don't date "nice guys". Fedoras are sort of associated with pushy men who demand attention from women, but who live in their parents' basements and spend a lot of their time vlogging about how feminists are ruining everything. How does this wikipedia entry not mention that? I think that is probably the single most prevalent view of fedoras on the internet today. While a comedic article, this indicates evidence for that perspective This Article Also something from from medium.com An actual misogynist website called "talking fedora"

Fedoras are often associated with male dominated contrarian viewpoints, such as libertarianism, atheism, men's rights activism etc. "Fedoras have become the online talisman of a certain strain of man-babyish libertarian white guy." Article discussing the shaming of people with fedoras due to the association with all of the above mentioned things.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:99DB:A700:6CAC:F107:54A4:D4EA (talk) 17:01, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Buzzfeed, blogs and other self-published sources are not reliable. We can find similar sources that state the Moon landings were faked, Hitler is still alive in a super-secret lair in Antarctica and the world is run by hybrids of humans and lizardmen from the Drago star cluster. - SummerPhDv2.0 17:22, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
No you will not find a site like Buzzfeed claiming the moon landing was fake. Stop making false equivalencies.Hoponpop69 (talk) 15:33, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
There are, as I stated, self-published sources which claim the Moon landings were faked. (Please submit a 500 word essay on the six Apollo Moon landings by noon tomorrow.)
My point is not that Buzzfeed saying something is a meme is no more reliable that some nutjob's blog saying George W. Bush was a human-alien hybrid. My point is that us adding material based on it showing up in several self-published sources is an unacceptably low bar for inclusion, whether the material is something trivial like a meme or an insane claim that a long-dead 120+ year old totalitarian is alive and well in a super-secret lair. - SummerPhDv2.0 18:04, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
There is far too much reddit meme stuff in this article. It needs a cull. MaxBrowne (talk) 08:19, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Suggested addition to the article[edit]

Seriously, why doesn't this article mention the popular internet meme yet? For a website, Wikipedia seems to have a HUGE aversion to including internet culture. --31.49.114.250 (talk) 19:08, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Provide reliable sources that show this a notable meme and it will be added. JDDJS (talk) 19:50, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
I added a source from Vice, and another from Escapist, which is already cited on an unrelated thing in the article. There were other previous sources like Buzzfeed, which someone removed comparing it to conspiracy theorist sites (?).Hoponpop69 (talk) 15:39, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
Sorry for the confusion. I am not saying it is a conspiracy site. I am saying self-published sources are not reliable for this material. I removed your new sources as not reliable for the new material. I have not looked at whether or not the second is reliable for anything else. - SummerPhDv2.0 18:48, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

"In this same time period, it also became negatively associated with nice guys."[edit]

The sources cited do not support this. We do not have reliable sources discussing trends in fashion saying that the fedora became "negatively associated" (?) with nice guys in a particular time period. Instead, we have a video game reviewer's personal reflection saying that women have connected an outfit of a black fedora with a "trechcoat or a dressed-down look" with supposed nice guys looking to get laid. We have another personal essay where the author says the fedora is a symbol of supposed nice guys who are "creepy neckbeard university socialist club meninist weirdo"s.

Did it "become associated"? We don't have sources for the broad claim. We have two guys' opinions.

Is it "negatively associated" with nice guys? We don't have sources for the broad claim. We have two guys who connect it to two different people: guys looking to get laid by acting nice and sexist hipsters. Yes, they do both use "nice guys" to ironically refer to different opposites of "nice"

Was this during a particular time period? We don't have sources for that broad claim. The essays say different things: One says women "have pegged" fedoras. The other says that -- it seems to him -- the fedora "has become". - SummerPhDv2.0 18:38, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

User:SummerPhDv2.0 (and User:MaxBrowne): I get that you're trying to keep some the localized internet crap from the article but there is a line. Not all of it can be dismissed (though Max did just delete all of it - "trimming" ≠ complete removal), and some of it can be included. Several of the sources provided by people were fine. Why are the goalposts being moved? Secondary media sources of repute are fine. "Self published" doesn't even apply to official distributed media. And tertiary academic sources are not a requisite for inclusion. Bataaf van Oranje (Prinsgezinde) (talk) 06:00, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
A bit of confusion here: Is the removal you are talking about from four months ago? I have no idea who or what you are quoting with "trimming" (which you then argue is an incorrect word choice). I cannot find it used on the talk page or in an edit summary.
Given that the last removal I made was someone citing personal opinion pieces in weak sources to make claims that the articles did not support. If there are sources/material removed where you feel the material was adequately supported by reliable sources, you'll need to be more specific.
You also are saying that WP:SPS does not apply to "official distributed media". I don't know which sources rejected/removed as SPS are official and distributed or officially distributed. I also don't understand what difference you feel this status makes. If I create an organization (let's say it's just me) and put the organization's name on a blog post saying something, it is now official, distributed and officially distributed. It is also a self-published source (no editorial oversight, no reputation for fact-checking and accuracy, etc.). Please clarify. - SummerPhDv2.0 13:06, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Definition of 'fedora'? The description of a 'fedora' used in this article does not really distinguish a 'fedora' from other felt hats with brims of various widths and center-creased crowns. Hats of that general description were worn decades before the Prince of Wales started wearing one in 1924. This article does not usefully distinguish 'fedoras' from other common styles of men's hats. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.212.80.149 (talk) 23:21, 12 May 2017 (UTC)