Talk:Pocketknife/Archive 1

Separate development for Slipjoint and Clasp-knife?

There's a relative dearth of info on traditional slipjoint pocketknives here on Wiki. I went to go shake the trees in the Trad forum on BladeForums.com, but not getting a lot of help there. I decided that things might flow better if I put up a stub for Slipjoint, thus giving everyone space to go add subsections for all the variants (Barlow, Stockman, Congress, etc).

Similarly, for traditional lockback knives (pre-dating the modern thumb-opening, pocket-clip Sypderco knives and the like) the only article is this one or the orphaned Clasp-knife article. Unless this is a major UK/USA difference, the term "Lockback" is much more common.

I'd submit that the article would run smoother if the Pocketknife article covered generalities and touched on each version lightly, with the bulk of the info being covered in Lockback knife and Slipjoint (re-name "slipjoint knife"?)

For a trial-run, I did create stubs for Barlow knife (which I believe could merit an article in its own right, like Bowie), and Peanut (knife) which might not rate its own article.

Thoughts?

MatthewVanitas (talk) 11:35, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removed images

When I first saw this page, it had only a Swiss army knife, which I consider very boring. Everyone has already seen one. There is almost no art in it. It was not in a context of other army knives but only as it usually appears to consumers. The purpose of Wikipedia is to find out what the advertising industry does not tell one. I tried to show the diversity and some history. The detailed pictures show the materials and mechanisms. In particular, the recent edit deleted my French knife that refutes the statement that older knives were not lock blades.

Until my recent edits, lock-blades were discussed but with no pictures. Has anyone else offered to provide the pictures needed to make this an interesting article? If so, let us delete mine as others appear, not solely because they are mine. If it was wasting space, let us delete it entirely, not make it dull again. David R. Ingham 06:09, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article had been swamped by no fewer than ten new images, too many even to fit physically in the space. I've reduced them to two (plus the existing one), which seems a more reasonable number to me. I'm sure it's true your motive in putting them up was not vanity, but it would certainly look like that to anyone visiting the page.

You don't say why you find the article boring, but the difference between boring and interesting is not a gallery of images, mostly unenlightening and frankly of no great technical or aesthetic quality. The pictures should be there to illustrate and clarify points made in the text, not just as eye-candy, but the deleted ones did neither of those things. I've left in the two that seemed to me the most informative and visually presentable, so that locknives and slipjoint knives now do have an illustration, one of which offers some scale and a variety of blade shapes. I really can't see what more is offered, at least to this particular article, by any of the other images. Incidentally one of them is almost identical to an image already available on Wikimedia (See Opinel knife).

I don't see how a picture of a modern Opinel knife refutes the point about early knives not being locknives, especially since in the case of Opinel knives, which go back about a century, the locking mechanism dates only from the 1950s.

"Pocket knife" is really quite a general subject. Perhaps there could be scope for some of these images and very specific technical points in articles on more specialist subjects such as "US Army knife". Flapdragon 12:19, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that Flapdragon is not a major contributor to this page. David R. Ingham 06:31, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You don't say what your point is here. I'm sure you don't mean to imply that having made more edits gives you extra rights over the article, which is of course not the case. Flapdragon 12:19, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I think having spent time gives my opinion more weight, until there is a consensus, on his page, that I failed to contribute significantly. Of course it is not the edit count that shows the time. Of the pictures I posted, only the Böker is ostentatious, and I don't think it is unusual to show high quality products in Wikipedia. (The bone handled pen knife may be of comparable quality, but its simplicity made it cheaper.) In fact I think it is unusual and valuable to show less expensive, and worn, items. We are a counterculture. We must show whatever popular advertising misses, too expensive or too cheap. If you knew there was a picture of an Opinel, why didn't you add a link to it before?

I first noticed Wikipedia by noticing that my searches for high resolution images often found it, perhaps because it has grown so much since many people have had broadband access. I did add to the descriptions of traditional blade shapes. Materials, of corse, are explained elsewhere. The fact that bone has so may different appearances was surprising to me at one time. I did not include any of my Pakistani knives, not because they are cheap (I tried to take a picture that showed a defect clearly.), but because, even though they have much more artistic value than do red plastic handles, I was not able to say how their styles fit into the general picture. David R. Ingham 04:53, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merging into Pocket knife

I merged the abandoned article, claspknife, into this article. It still needs references. I may do the same with the stub articles Barlow knife and Peanut (knife), because they are stubby and don't seem to be expanding. The creator of these two articles was not certain if these two really merited their own articles. If anyone ever decides to expand on the topics, they can decide when it is time to get them their own articles again. --SV Resolution(Talk) 12:32, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~I don't see the need for a merge, but if that's what is decided, I would suggest they all go into one section~~. Nevermind, looks good as long as the text and sources carry-over and Barlow gets a redirect.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 04:34, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I tried that once, without the signboard, and got reverted, so I'll leave the source article for a bit, and see if the reverter reconsiders. --SV Resolution(Talk) 11:42, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I just realized that you were the reverter, and that that you now don't object. So I'll complete the merge. --SV Resolution(Talk) 18:01, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good!--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 18:04, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

moved from article

Clip — the upper part of the blade is cut away convexly to form a sharp point directly in front of the handle.
Spear — edge and back curve together to a point. Probably the most common style of general purpose blade found on pocketknives.
Peanut -- a very small slipjoint knife, designed to be legal in almost any environment.
Drop point — similar to spear but not necessarily symmetrical
Pen — similar to a spear but smaller. Originally intended to sharpen quill pens, but continues to be used because of its suitability to fine or delicate work. A pen knife generally has one or two pen blades, and does not interfere with the appearance of dress clothes when carried in the pocket.
Sheep's foot (so named because of its appearance) — wide with straight edge and no point, common on boats and ships. Intended for heavier tasks such as carving wood
Wharncliffe — flat cutting edge with back curve, similar to sheep's foot but with longer curve
Spay or spey — clipped at the back to form a sort of point, but the clip is very short. These were originally for castrating livestock and are used for delicate work.
Hook - The inside of the hook is sharp and the outside edge dull, so that a rope or animal skin can be cut without cutting the surface that the knife travels along. These blades are used by hunters for gutting animals and by emergency rescue people for cutting seat belts without harming the wearer.

Jackknife

The searchphrase "jackknife" leads to a disambiguation page, and one of the top links there, leads to this Pocket knife page, but the Pocket knife page does not mention the word jackknife anywhere. I have no time to figure this out or fix it at the moment, but at some point, I would like to see this page at least mention the word as a synonym if it is appropriate, or to make clear how the word relates to "pocket knife." Thanks. Fallendarling (talk) 01:38, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have an impression from the days before the Wikipedia that "jackknife" originally meant the kind of knife carried by a "jack tar" or sailor, and was sloppily extended to all folding knives. I don't know whether I will be able to verify this. J S Ayer (talk) 23:23, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

opening paragraph

Opening envelopes, cutting twine, slicing an apple... Correct me if I am wrong, but I think that anyone looking at this page has no use for this information. I think one can connect the dots once it is learned that a knife cuts things. I can kind of understand self defense, however. I propose a revision —Preceding unsigned comment added by Badair (talk • contribs) 02:32, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

United Kingdom legality

"Folding knives with blades of 3 inches or less may be carried without needing to provide "good reason" so long as the blade is not capable of being locked in the open position."

The law only mentioned folding knives and the part about locking blades was introduced after a court case in England so does it apply to the whole of the UK or is Scotland exempt? Pleasetry (talk) 18:49, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

UK legality - that quote citing a 'crime of non-intent'?

"even if you carry a knife to protect yourself or make yourself feel safer but don’t intend to use it then you are committing a crime."

issues:

a) this quote is currently not on a UK gov site

b) this quote does not feature in the two archived snapshots of the original link: ^[1] ^[2] There it says, rather differently "Some people say that they carry a knife to protect themselves or make themselves feel safer, even though they would never think of using it. But did you know that you’re actually more likely to become a victim of crime if you’re carrying a knife? It could even be used to harm you by someone else."41.191.250.26 (talk) 10:44, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

References

Hobo knife

I think there should be a section on hobo knives, folding knives with folding forks and spoons, often coming apart into two or even three pieces for use in dining. If I can find some good sources I will put something together. I will be delighted if someone else does it first. J S Ayer (talk) 23:30, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Emergency

Hang on, an ‘emergency tracheotomy’ … ?

OK, why on earth am I trying not to think of Mack the Knife … ?

Cuddy2977 (talk) 20:22, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttp://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20081202190828/http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/YoungPeople/CrimeAndJustice/TypesOfCrime/DG_172800

[2] ttp://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20090210145650/http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/YoungPeople/CrimeAndJustice/TypesOfCrime/DG_172800

[1]

[2]