|WikiProject Textile Arts||(Rated Start-class, High-importance)|
A comparison of synthetic textiles should mention common applications for each. Why choose one over another? For example, in my experience, nylon "breathes" better than polyester. Is there a trade-off between breathe-ability and water resistance? Admittedly, water resistance can be enhanced for fabrics through the application of a durable water repellent (DWR). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 19:49, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Descriptions of the various methods of producing synthetic fibers are incredibly poor. Would someone knowledgeable on the subject please elaborate each method into its own section, providing a clear overview? --BBUCommander (talk) 02:11, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
Maybe if anyone wants to do the research and create a small table called buyer's guide saying something like 1st collumn fiber type: rayon, 2nd collumn aliases: viscose (used in Europe), 3rd collumn processing subtype with altered properties: polynosic, 4th collumn commercial aliases of the 3rd collumn: Modal is a registered trademark air conditioning
This is the top page for synthetic fibers. This structure seemed to make the most sense to me (and well, it also mirrored my source material) although I'm going to have to reconcile it with the Textile page.
I also intend to create pages and subpages on animal and plant fibers now that I've been given permission to copy. --Daniel Quinlan 08:49 17 Jul 2003 (UTC)
- I'm not sure it's a good idea to use material from this source, even with permission. All text content on Wikipedia (with rare exceptions, most notably brief, explicit quotations on which we claim fair use) is supposed to be licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. This permission doesn't seem compatible with that license. Among other problems, it doesn't provide rights for downstream users to distribute the material. How much of this article is taken from your source? Did you just use the information, or is a lot of it verbatim? We may end up having to delete the borrowed material, unless your source is willing to re-license the text under the GFDL or another GFDL-compatible license. —Caesura(t) 18:42, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
- The article predates the usage of the GDFL -- it was 3 years ago! Also, they gave permission without requiring credit. There is no issue. If you wish, you can ask them for updated permission, if you're nice about it, I'm sure they'll give permission. If not, I believe it is fine to leave the article alone. Daniel Quinlan 08:04, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
From: Whole Earth Magazine <email@example.com> To: quinlan Subject: Re: permission for information on fibers Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 17:56:48 -0700 No problem. We'd appreciate your crediting the information to us: Whole Earth magazine, No. 90, Summer 1997. www.wholeearth.com Best wishes, Michael Stone Managing Editor
Man Made / Cellulosics / Synthetics
I am not an expert on these terms, but it seems to me that this page could be tidied up a little to better reflect on the distinctions,. The page on fibers [] does a better job. It is my understanding that cellulosics are NOT included in the category of synthetics, but are listed on this page with a not very helpful note that they are not really synthetics. -- Natural fibre 11:29, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
- (Ten years later!) I am confused a little about what this page covers, vs. what is covered elsewhere (and where). The lede includes sentence "Before synthetic fibers were developed, artificially manufactured fibers were made from polymers obtained from petro chemicals," which suggests artificial fibres made from petrochemicals are something else. What are they called, and can we link to that?