Talk:Suspenders

Fashion Mid‑importance

	Fashion portal 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.FashionWikipedia:WikiProject FashionTemplate:WikiProject Fashionfashion articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by Dthomsen8, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on September 2015.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

Comments

The link for mark twains patent doesn't work.

The following, very long sequence, is the correct URL to an image page of Mark Twain's patent:

http://patimg2.uspto.gov/.piw?Docid=00121992&homeurl=http%3A%2F%2Fpatft.uspto.gov%2Fnetacgi%2Fnph-Parser%3FSect1%3DPTO1%2526Sect2%3DHITOFF%2526d%3DPALL%2526p%3D1%2526u%3D%25252Fnetahtml%25252FPTO%25252Fsrchnum.htm%2526r%3D1%2526f%3DG%2526l%3D50%2526s1%3D0121992.PN.%2526OS%3DPN%2F0121992%2526RS%3DPN%2F0121992&PageNum=&Rtype=&SectionNum=&idkey=NONE&Input=View+first+page

The invention is called "Improvement in Adjustable and Detachable Straps for Gentlemen"; which, however, at least insofar as the illustration is a true and faithful representation of the device, far more resembles an extendible belt than any sort of trouser-braces.

Twain is referenced as Inventor under his own name Samuel L Clemens.

Nuttyskin 01:47, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As for public figures that wear suspenders, well known Alabama Meteorologist James Spann of ABC33/40 in Birmingham almost always wears suspenders. It's kind of his trademark. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.94.183.21 (talk) 17:41, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Garter / Suspenders

Replaced the double reference to de:Strapse

because Strapse is Garters, where it is already referred to 80.133.16.49 10:39, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed tag

This article now muddles up two meanings of garter:

the American word, which means suspenders in British and Commonwealth English
the British word, which means a band worn to keep a sock or stocking up

It is tricky to sort this out, because of the alterations made to the article on garters. I have contacted the editor who made these changes, but had no response. Can anyone sort it out easily, or do we need admin assistance to roll back the changes to both articles?--Taxwoman 12:38, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I really don't understand why the two articles have been merged. Safedom 14:09, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about a garters (American) and a garters (British) page? Wrad 03:33, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I created the pages, garter (American) redirects to suspenders. It may take awhile to fix the links to the new British page.Wrad 03:44, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay there is a garter (British) page for the stocking holder, and a suspender page for the pants holder. Unfortunately, I'm not sure if this totally clears up the confusion, although it does create a needed separation. Any ideas for lessening the confusion more? Wrad 05:02, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In England, 'suspenders' are, or were, a band (usually elasticated) worn around the calf with a clip hanging down to hold up a sock - worn by men. A 'suspender belt' was worn around the waist / hips by a woman to hold up silk or nylon stockings. Long woollen socks, worn by males with shorts (whether old-fashioned schoolboys, footballers or as Australian formal wear) were termed stockings and held up by a garter as a band around the leg just underneath the knee, usually in plain grey or black elastic although more decorative garters could be used by women to hold their stockings up. too. The dividing line seems to be between things that hold trousers up (belts, braces, baling twine ...) and things that hold hosiery up (but, then, where is the vital distinction between tights, footless tights, leggings and trousers ? Simon Crome 27 January 2011 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.43.167.104 (talk) 15:20, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted Content

I deleted the info on Garters because they should really have their own article, as Garters have little to no relation to Braces-User:Booksbooksbooks

The link to the German page isn't accurate. The german translation for braces (as suspenders for trousers) is Hosenträger in German, not Strumpfbande.

Elasticized? Who says?

I realize that most, if not all, suspenders made or worn these days are elastic in some part, but is this truly a necessary characteristic? I'm no expert (or even student; this is purely logic, hence my careful steps) but would think that, for most of their history, suspenders involved adjustable fabric -- via clips, pins, etc. -- instead of elastic to achieve the proper fit. Anyone object to my change? Czrisher 17:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Elasticity is definitely not an essential or necessary characterisitic of suspenders/braces. I wear braces every day, and none of them are elasticized. Mine are silk with leather tabs. Also, some braces are made out of leather, and they definitely are not elasticized. I'm going to remove the word from the article.149.32.192.33 (talk) 11:50, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Couldn't we have a more modern picture of braces on this page??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.79.161.1 (talk) 05:25, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I find the fact that there is now a photo of Larry King on this page hilarious. Nobody remove that. Sofar 2 (talk) 09:16, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Differing terminology

See Talk:Garter (stockings)#British English. Opera hat (talk) 15:14, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Illustration

The present illustration is particularly distressing to the British idea of what to wear. Not only are the braces fake (clip-ons masquerading as proper button-on braces), but the trousers have belt-loops (why, if you're wearing braces?) and the shirt not only has a pocket on the front but has a button-down collar as well. Can't somebody find a more suitable picture, please? Opera hat (talk) 00:49, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The shirt has button cuffs, too, but I suppose that is a matter for personal preference rather than a full-blown sartorial gaffe as with the points mentioned above. Opera hat (talk) 00:52, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know the expression "belt and suspenders"? It means to take extra care, perhaps too much care. --Una Smith (talk) 22:23, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does anybody outside of Britain really care about "the British idea of what to wear?" Doubtful. 68.101.143.168 (talk) 00:21, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bavarian

What about these Bavarian braces, worn on Lederhosen and also on other traditional clothing? --Una Smith (talk) 22:21, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Check out the package on that guy! --71.205.219.29 (talk) 07:05, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Advertising

I found the article nearly consumed by multiple and lengthy portions of pure advertisement, primarily by two companies. I have reverted the article to remove this vandalism. The article should be watched in the future to ensure this does not happen again. 24.252.200.64 (talk) 04:19, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't help but think, is this an Albert Thurston advertisement? I see nothing wrong with including references if the company does, indeed, have a long history in manufacturing suspenders, but the puffery and extremely subjective language along with the awkward insertions don't even pretend to belong in an objective article. I can't imagine a skilled PR professional would bumble through like that, but I digress. I'm new and not entirely sure how to revert changes, etc., but are there editors more skilled who might address that? Alanus mercator (talk) 20:42, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I realize this is from a while ago, and probably no-one will read this, but I think he's referring to this, which talks about "Sal Herman" and his "No-slip suspender clip". — Preceding unsigned comment added by UserJDalek (talk • contribs) 02:34, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

Sounds like this was written by someone who really, really wants the world to think that suspenders are still in style. Can someone make it a little less suspender-fanboyish? 68.101.143.168 (talk) 00:20, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

types of suspenders: Y and ?

Came looking for the names of the different types of suspenders. But have done the res myself https://www.swaggerandswoon.com/guides/braces.php The Y type has 2 straps at the front that join together on the mid back and then a SINGLE STRAP GOES DOWN FROM THE JOIN TO THE (damn caps lock) waistband.

The X type has two straps on the waistband both fron and rear, and join on the back.

4 clip and 3 clip are other names for the 2 sorts. 203.7.99.17 (talk) 04:47, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ridiculous TV section

There is way too much written about TV shows in the "Fashion" section. While some pop cultural references may be appropriate, the section is more focused on television, than actual contemporary or historical fashion. In fact, the section is especially niche "fandom" style shows, which are extremely unlikely to drive trends due to the lower cultural cache of their viewers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:59F:F6C4:1D7F:28:DFA2:B85D (talk) 04:47, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 17 January 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: WP:SNOW close as proposed. I will start a new discussion for the alternatives presented in a new section to get those options away from the "snow" that is figuratively blinding the discussion from going those directions. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 20:57, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Suspenders → Braces – British English or American English? I'd support British English here. That seems to be the general tendences for, at least, more traditional clothing on Wikipedia, such as black tie, morning dress, etc. PPEMES (talk) 00:42, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per WP:TITLEVAR, MOS:ENGVAR and WP:TITLECHANGES. The original variety of English in this article was American[1]. WP:JDLI is no reason to change the variety of English in an article or a title. --В²C ☎ 01:11, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Born2cycle. I should also note braces is currently a disambiguation page and this would not be the primary topic for the term. FWIW, I’d also challenge the notion that “black tie,” “white tie” and “morning dress” are solely British terms as they are well known in the U.S. See [2] [3] Calidum 02:04, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I meant that article verbiage there follow British conventions where differing. PPEMES (talk) 02:15, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Per WP:NATURAL Braces is too ambiguous. If I hear "braces" I immediately think about dental braces and knee/foot braces. Timmyshin (talk) 02:30, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. We don't switch from one version of English to another unless an article's subject matter has some kind of link to another version of English. This policy prevents constant and pointless bickering over what version of English should be used. Rreagan007 (talk) 03:14, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above except Timmyshin. You can't invoke WP:NATURAL here, keep to Born2cycle's arguments; otherwise it is WP:JDLI in the opposite direction. Remember that to BrEng ears "suspenders" is misleading and suggests a (snigger, snigger) "naughty" item! Martin of Sheffield (talk) 08:11, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support braces (menswear) or trouser braces, for four reasons: (1) per consistency with trousers not "pants"; (2) trouser braces are essentially British, were invented in Britain, popularized in Britain and associated with Britain MOS:ENGVAR. (3) suspenders is a term which provokes sniggers and (4) is ambiguous. At the very least a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT for suspenders (menswear) is required here per balance of WP:CRITERIA. Any of these three options would be an improvement for readers. @PPEMES:, what thinkest thou?. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:08, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I support your message entirely. PPEMES (talk) 10:44, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support this, but it should be a separate proprosal after this one closes. Trouser braces works very well. The current title should then redirect to a missing section at stockings (just google image search “suspenders” and ignore the men pictures). —SmokeyJoe (talk) 13:42, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose braces (menswear) or trouser braces for same reason: this article was started in American English and we don't change varieties of English, not even (1) to be consistent with a related article, (2) to align with earlier usage in British English (British English is of course older and many if not most topics had terms in British English before American English existed), (3) to avoid ridicule in British culture, (4) to avoid ambiguity when the topic in question is clearly the PRIMARYTOPIC for the title in question, which this one clearly is. --В²C ☎ 17:53, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose because braces must redirect to the disambiguation page brace, because many of them only come in multiples. Plus the many other reasons given above. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 13:37, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Move to Trouser suspenders or something similar. Suspenders used in this sense is mostly North American English. To others, "suspenders" means the things you use to hold stockings up. I accept this falls under WP:ENGVAR, but that doesn't take away the fact that in most of the world this is not the primary topic for the word "suspenders". -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:34, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, per above discussion and per References used on the page. Randy Kryn (talk) 22:01, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above and per WP:PLURALPT.

I dislike the current title. I would support a move to Braces (clothing), currently a unisex redirect. 'Suspenders' is ambiguous in British English, where the word usually means suspender belt or (much less commonly) sock suspenders. It never means those things which hold your trousers up. Narky Blert (talk) 14:55, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 23 January 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 03:50, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Suspenders → ? – This is a procedural discussion to discuss alternative titles to move this article: See Talk:Suspenders#Requested move 17 January 2019. As of this moment, some alternative suggestions for titles to move this article are Braces (clothing), Braces (menswear), Trouser braces and Trouser suspenders. I am neutral. Steel1943 (talk) 21:07, 23 January 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. — Amakuru (talk) 15:08, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@PPEMES, Born2cycle, Calidum, Timmyshin, Rreagan007, Martin of Sheffield, In ictu oculi, SmokeyJoe, Necrothesp, Randy Kryn, and Narky Blert: Pinging participants in the previous discussion to make them aware of the new discussion. (Hope I didn't miss anyone.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:13, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per references used on the page, per the snow close which just occurred, and per examples in the commons category]. Randy Kryn (talk) 21:29, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Randy Kryn: out of interest what pictures do you get when you Google image "suspenders" where you are :) just asking ? In ictu oculi (talk) 23:35, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose all British English alternatives per WP:TITLEVAR and MOS:ENGVAR. The original variety of English in this article was American[4]. WP:JDLI is no reason to change the variety of English in an article or a title. Oppose alternatives in American English per WP:COMMONNAME. Most importantly, there is no policy based argument presented for title change in this nor the previous nom; so strongest oppose is per WP:TITLECHANGES (If an article title has been stable for a long time, and there is no good reason to change it, it should not be changed.. As such I would support an immediate WP:SNOW close. --В²C ☎ 21:39, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Also Oppose Trouser suspenders. This article was created and written in American English. The WP:COMMONNAME for this topic in American English is "suspenders". The meaning in any other variety of English is not relevant to an article created and written in the American English variety. That's what WP:ENGVAR is all about. "Trouser suspenders" is awkward and uncommon in American English. --В²C ☎ 19:13, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose all per WP:TITLEVAR and WP:TITLECHANGES. Calidum 22:35, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:TITLEVAR should be AfDed. It serves no purpose at all other than IDON'TLIKEIT. In ictu oculi (talk) 23:33, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. TITLEVAR does not support Calidum's argument. It includes an example highly relevant to the instant discussion: "soft drink was selected to avoid the choice between the British fizzy drink, American soda, American and Canadian pop, and a slew of other nation- and region-specific names". Narky Blert (talk) 23:43, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. Being misscited. Likewise WP:TITLECHANGES clearly allows the howlingly obvious need for a change here. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:00, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

TITLEVAR applies because there is no opportunity for commonality here. Calidum 21:31, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to Braces (clothing) for the reasons which I gave in the previous discussion, which I now elaborate.

This is not one of those cases where different terms are used for the same thing on different sides of the Atlantic, such as hood (car) (US; UK, bonnet) or trunk (car) (US; UK, boot). Those cause no problem, it's just another meaning to learn. The nearest analogy to the instant case I can think of is rubber: in US a condom, in UK an eraser. (The memory of the time when, visiting US from UK, I asked a US colleague if I could use his rubber still brings me out in a cold sweat.)

Considering the world as a whole, 'suspenders' is hopelessly ambiguous. In US, men wear them to keep their trousers up; in UK, women wear them to keep their stockings up (or, not, depending on the situation). Different genders; one above, one below the waist. Imagine, if you will, a male US visitor to UK asking where he can buy suspenders. Per WP:ASTONISH, neither is the primary meaning, and we should choose a title which will mislead no-one. Narky Blert (talk) 23:02, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I would accept the title trouser suspenders. Even if that is not a name commonly used (if at all), it is descriptive and unambiguous. It would not puzzle any readers. Narky Blert (talk) 23:37, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I start off with Oppose per Born2cycle. However the term is confusing and does tend to raise a snigger among BrEng speakers. If the article is to be renamed, then I'd go for Rename to Trouser suspenders. This should remove the snigger-factor from BrEng, keep the Yanks happy and make it clear what we are talking about. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 23:16, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The American word is "pants" not "trousers", so that suggested title would be mixing British and American terms, which makes no sense. "Pant suspenders" would be what it would have to move to. Rreagan007 (talk) 02:58, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. However AIUI Americans understand the word "trousers" unambiguously even if they don't use it normally. Brits will not understand pants to mean outerwear unless the context forces it, "pants" are underwear. Therefore I'd suggest WP:COMMONNAME and WP:TITLEVAR apply and "trousers" would be the preferred option. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 09:18, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to Braces (clothing) for the reasons given by several editors in the previous discussion, a elaborated above. Most of all the current title of "sexy lingerie" fails completely. However trouser suspenders okay as second choice in deference to US ownership of this article. In ictu oculi (talk) 23:30, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The article should remain where it currently is. Rreagan007 (talk) 02:58, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Trouser suspenders, a very good natural disambiguation for what really is a highly ambiguous term outside the US —SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:13, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Trouser suspenders. ENGVAR or no, the current article title is highly ambiguous for people outside North America. To us, suspenders are what you use to hold stockings up and this is certainly not the primary topic for the word. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:52, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just typing out loud: Trouser suspenders is shaping up to be the go-to term for those who oppose the present title. This may be adequate and solve the overall concern as long as "suspenders" redirects to the term. I'll put it up as a redirect now, and hopefully, if this page is renamed, "suspenders" will still redirect here. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:59, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

While I still suppose I would prefer braces or some combination of that word, being the original titling here, it seems indeed like trouser suspenders would be the secondary best option. PPEMES (talk) 13:05, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This is a simple WP:ENGVAR issue. No one uses "Trouser suspenders". While "Suspenders" may be unusual in some regional variations of English, "Braces" is quite unusual in American English. There is no clear opportunity for WP:COMMONALITY for this title, so we should just leave the article where it is. —BarrelProof (talk) 19:34, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@BarrelProof: one issue, addition to WP:COMMONALITY is whether mens' braces is the worldwide PRIMARYTOPIC for "suspenders". So Question A for any editor is "Would you agree that Google image search suggests that it is not?" If so then Question B to any editor: what would you then say to suspenders (menswear) to distinguish from suspenders (womenswear)? In ictu oculi (talk) 09:26, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And leave the ambiguity? How is this beneficial? ENGVAR is fine if it's unambiguous, but this is not the case here. No one may use "trouser suspenders", but nobody outside North America uses "suspenders" to refer to these items either. In fact, most probably don't even know what "suspenders" are in a North American context and would be rather surprised to find out that they were for holding trousers up rather than stockings. We also need to respect WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, and the primary topics for this word are completely different in North America and elsewhere; it is very rarely the case that a term has one overwhelmingly primary topic in one area and another in another area. And we are still respecting ENGVAR with the proposed name in any case. An alternative would be Suspenders (menswear), Suspenders (trousers), or something similar. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:37, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't checked MOS over this, but would "Suspenders or Braces" satisfy both camps? Martin of Sheffield (talk) 10:01, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Never how we do titles. We only ever use one term. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:39, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As for Suspenders (menswear), I suppose I have no strong objection, although (as noted in the article) women have sometimes been known to wear them. Also, I suggest seeing what pictures pop up on a web search for "suspenders for men's socks". IBM employees were known for wearing them – so it doesn't fully resolve that ambiguity. —BarrelProof (talk) 13:24, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Per WP:ENGVAR. This is simply attempting to change to a British spelling of the same topic but there is no need to._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 15:54, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Have you actually read the comments above? There is need to, because outside North America "suspenders" is highly ambiguous and indeed usually means something entirely different. This is not a straight ENGVAR issue. It is not usually the case that a word has one primary meaning in American English and another quite different primary meaning in Commonwealth English. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:03, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - no convincing alternative or opportunity for WP:COMMONALITY, so per WP:ENGVAR we should MOS:RETAIN. -- Netoholic @ 02:16, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Braces

Just another of the millions of articles on Wikipedia where American English takes precedent, because Americans don't realise that practically every English speaking country of the world, use British English.

Americans are in a minority when it comes to the English language, therefore British English which is spoken all over the world, should be the priority language on Wikipedia. The same goes for the titles and names of things like films, TV shows, books, games, foods, brands etc, as every country in the world apart from the USA, will know that product as one thing, but the Americans will still insist on using their minority, renamed title.

However as we can clearly see from the 2 recent requests, "Americans refuse to be corrected," just like they always do!

Danstarr69 (talk)

I came here looking for the idiom "belt and braces" (as in having both for an excessive level of backup and redundancy), a phrase which gets used a lot more in real life than actual braces (or suspenders), but unfortunately the article fails to address it.

As for the British English versus American argument lets look at the trends https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?q=%22belt%20and%20braces%22,%22belt%20and%20suspenders%22 and see if we can look at it objectively. -- 109.79.187.52 (talk) 14:45, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Button-end suspenders in the UK

As a seasoned British wearer, I find the claim that button-end suspenders are hard to find in the UK difficult to accept. Of course, very few wear suspenders over here at all, but they can be obtained with not a whole lot more difficulty than the clip-on kind.

I refer to the first paragraph in "usage".

Daedalus 96 (talk) 14:40, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]