|Hairstyle has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Life. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as Start-Class.|
|WikiProject Fashion||(Rated C-class, Top-importance)|
- 1 Untitled
- 2 Underwhelming article
- 3 Couple of styles missing
- 4 Fair use rationale for Image:Ringlet.jpg
- 5 Question-
- 6 That YouTube video needs to be replaced
- 7 """SHAGGY"" HAIR CUT
- 8 French Braid
- 9 The name of this hairstyle
- 10 Scene hair?
- 11 Spanish style?
- 12 Image copyright problem with File:Louise Brooks in Pandora's Box.jpg
- 13 History of Hairstyle
- 14 Donut style
- 15 Styles with no picture/explanation
- 16 hairstyle terminology and NPOV
- 17 pointless links
- 18 someone is deleting content from this page
- 19 Neat video
- 20 Earliest history?
- 21 Part
- 22 Assessment comment
Both Bob Marley and The Beatles are mentioned in the corresponding articles (Dreadlocks and Beatle_haircut). I don't believe I can see what contributions Jennifer Aniston and Dido might have made that are known to me. But then again I only got here by clicking on Random article -- GSchjetne 01:04, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
I think this article should be centered on the historical worldwide social and cultural perceptions and attitudes associated with hairstyles, and not just "such and such hairstyle was fashionable for women in the United States on the 60's". A more global view would be very nice. It would also be nice if it talked about hairstyles of the ancient world. It is also very centered on women hairstyles (which, being fair, are usually the most diverse). Sadly, I'm no expert in the subject so I can't really contribute. Oantonio (talk) 14:42, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
- I don't think there should even be an article on this. Just leaving a simple definition would be better than this mess. More specific topics with enough content should have their own pages. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 00:07, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Couple of styles missing
There is no mention of the Hair styles of a Manchu Noble Women. Obsessions28 (talk) 13:00, 22 July 2008 (UTC) you are also missing the v hair style witch is a v witch starts from a mini raty and gos all the way up the sides witch are shorter then the top and gel the sides up and top scruff like and the back spikie —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 00:13, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Ringlet.jpg
Image:Ringlet.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
also the coral curl cliffter, the bashful afro and the flickstar dove tail is missing. Thse are all pretty well known styles that i would like to see included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 17:31, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
When you put a ponytail on top of your head, what's it called?
That YouTube video needs to be replaced
Why the **** does that link (http://www.weeklydig.com/style/articles/le_gala_hair_group) redirect to some stupid YouTube video? I'm erasing the link.
I entirely agree. That video is completely inappropriate for the stylistic standards (no pun intended) of Wikipedia. One can assume that anything with "hairstyles by ____" is not exactly going to be an unbiased source, not to mention the influence of original research :)
"""SHAGGY"" HAIR CUT
*LIKE A THE BEATLES,OASIS,THE HIVES... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Albertrocker (talk • contribs) 22:38, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
id say a polish braid my self it looks asthough it been double crossed under handed.
The name of this hairstyle
The hairstyle that the character Raziel from Soul Reaver has, does anyone know the name of it? Is it listed here?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 21:51, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with File:Louise Brooks in Pandora's Box.jpg
The image File:Louise Brooks in Pandora's Box.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
- That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
- That this article is linked to from the image description page.
History of Hairstyle
I came to this article looking for a history of hair-cutting and hairstyles, which Wikipedia seem to usually have, but there is not one for hair-cutting and hairstyles correct? --Matthew Bauer (talk) 03:30, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
- I originally came to this article for the same thing. I've not found any pages recounting the history of hair-cutting, and I believe this would be the appropriate article to contain such information. If anyone knows of decent sources on this topic, I'll gladly incorporate the information into the article. -Verdatum (talk) 18:52, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
There may be another word for it, but it's a style worn by girls and Sikh boys. It's basically pigtails twisted up above the ears or at the back of the head. (See here thumb and here  22.214.171.124 (talk) 17:42, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Styles with no picture/explanation
In the Notable Hairstyles section, What is the purpose of listing the style "part" with no corresponding article, description or picture. Also should the cuts which only have links have at least a brief description in the table? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 23:22, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
- In cleaning up, I left in "part" because I figured it would be possible to write and article (or at least a section) on the concept, and while it may not be a hairstyle in the strictest sense, it is an important aspect of hairstyling. If anyone feels it doesn't belong, and removes it, I certainly won't cry. While I don't know if a table of hairstyles is the best thing for this article, so long as the table is here, yes, entries in the table should ideally be filled in as completely as possible. Inlined references to Reliable Sources would be extra nice. -Verdatum (talk) 15:59, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
hairstyle terminology and NPOV
The terminology of the selected haircuts feels really shaky to me. Some terms, like 'ringlets' and 'ponytail' are obviously really established, but 'Dido flip' and 'fauxhawk' - well, maybe I'm out of touch, but I've never heard of these styles outside of the pages of last week's Heat magazine and some of them sound a little more like insider trends than established terminology.
I'm all for the inclusion of these for the fullest possible cataloguing of hairstyles, but there should be common standards to acknowledge what is very new and based around trends, and what is very established. Would it be worth mentioning in what period and what cultures each of the hairstyle names/types have been in use? Eg ringlets being in common use between the late 18th Century-late 19th Century in Western cultures, Dido flip being in use since the late 1990s-present in Western cultures, etc etc (I'm guessing here). Otherwise the whole article seems to make no difference between historical styles, long term trends, cutting-edge developments - and things that were just a flash in the pan.
I'd also recommend acknowledging just once some of the UK English equivalents to these uniformly US centric terms, eg 'braids' are 'plaits' in UK English.
- The way I see it, the list is largely a compilation of any Wikipedia article discussing a particular hairstyle. So if there's an article on it, then it can go in the list. Personally, I'm alright with this. On the other hand, some of these hairstyles may have questionable Notability, as per WP:Notability. In those cases, the appropriateness of the existence of articles for those individual hairstyles should be discussed on their respective article talkpages, and possibly be tagged for WP:Proposed Deletion or discussed at WP:Articles for Deletion.
- I think ideally, any hairstyle that doesn't yet have it's own article should only be included in the list if its description (and possibly significance) can be backed up by references to Reliable Sources. When I cleaned up the list, I left in a couple entries (e.g. "Short back and sides", "part") because even though I was too lazy to track down such references, I had little doubt that such sources could be found without too much trouble.
- You make an excellent point about region specific names for hairstyles.
- I removed the "considered sexy" line you mentioned. Anything even close to that silly can be fixed/removed. -Verdatum (talk) 14:48, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
some of the links under the "Selected hairstyles" section of the article, leads striaght to the same article your already looking at, these are pointless and should be removed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 22:10, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
someone is deleting content from this page
I added to the list of hairstyles a section about a "virtual hairstyle", it was deleted with no explanation and it is totally a relevant thing to put here, if speaking about hairstyle, a virtual hairstyle is something that may be new, but is certainly here to stay and so why should wikipedia not give an explanation of what it is on its page about hairstyle. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 11:04, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Response I agree that virtual hairstyles should form a part of the wiki. Main stream sites mostly have a section on virtual hairstyles. For example http://newhairstyleswomen.com and the hairstyler.com (the main virtual online hair site) discuss virtual hairstyles. It is obvious a subject that receives many searches and the section on it would complete or add to the wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Psychic1 (talk • contribs) 13:32, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
- Yea this video is interesting and gives a general overview, but the problem is, as with the rest of the article, that this is only representative of the history of "Western" styles. Though, we could use this to find the sources and styles back then. We still need documentation on the styles of different ethnic groups/peoples all over the world (which means that when we have enough info, this article will probably have to be split into different pages since this is a very wide/general topic). - M0rphzone (talk) 08:21, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
I'd love to see mention of when/why/what/how the haircutting began in early man. I know primates groom one another, but at what point did men and women start cutting hair? Wearing hair up and out of the way? Does hair in the wild fall out at a shorter length? Does long hair interfere with hunting (and fleeing)?
We had this. It now redirects to List of hairstyles per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Part (haircut). Some of that content and the gender left/right/middle thing and could reasonably be in this article. I will leave it to others to decide.
- External link (but lousy ref): http://www.hairfinder.com/hair4/comb-hair.htm
The comment(s) below were originally left at several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section., and are posted here for posterity. Following
|Far too many lists of indiscriminate information and links. Picture says almost nothing helpful to the article. Much work could be done here. Daniel Case 19:15, 8 April 2007 (UTC)|
Last edited at 19:15, 8 April 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 16:59, 29 April 2016 (UTC)