Talk:Formal wear

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Tuxedo"[edit]

Originally a Tuxedo was a fancy Mexican jacket, regardless of with what it was worn. My recollection is that it became popular in California somewhere around the 1960's (could be earlier), during the Californian trend to a more relaxed and more decorative style of dressing Historygypsy (talk) 15:32, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Answers... as I see them anyway[edit]

The basic problem is that “Evening Wear” is not synonymous with “Formal Wear” – “Evening Wear” may have differing levels of formality and is restricted to evening. “Formal Wear” is a term describing a range of wear/attire, i.e. Full-Dress down to a double-breasted tux for Formal Evening Wear and a Frock Coat down to a standard suit for Formal Daytime Wear.

Whereas Women's Formal Wear/Attire exists and is heavily dictated by fashion and popular influence, Men's Formal Wear/Attire is not subject to popular influences. Variations on a tuxedo, by the very definition of a tuxedo, make them a suit and therefore casual evening attire.

My expertise is in men's attire, and my outline below would need much elaboration and refinement in the women's areas, but I think it's a good start. I already have most information gathered and assembled. What is certain: terms should be standardized, a hierarchy/outline established, sexes need be differentiated within genres... and someone needs to write the articles with broad knowledge.

My suggestion on how to organize the hierarchy of pages (pages in bold)"

Attire:

  • Men's Attire:
    • Men's Formal Attire:
      • Men's Formal Evening Attire: (strictly to be worn after 6:00 PM only - From most formal to least formal, respectively)
        • Full Dress a.k.a. "white-tie" (Tail Coat)
        • Dinner Jacket (Single-Breasted Tuxedo)
        • White Dinner Coat (Single- or Double-Breasted White Tuxedo Coat) Only for use in hot summer weather where a ‘Dinner Coat’ would have otherwise been used, use is optional unless stated otherwise. Double-Breasted is preferred because it eliminates the need for a waistcoat.
        • Double-Breasted Dinner Jacket (Double-Breasted Tuxedo)
      • Men's Formal Day Attire: a.k.a. "Morning Wear" (From most formal to least formal, respectively)
        • Frock Coat
        • Morning Coat/Suit (Cutaway Coat)
        • Sack Coat
        • Business or Sack Suits (standard suit of today)
    • Men's Business Attire:
      • The Office
      • The Corporate Meeting
      • "Business Casual"
    • Men's Casual Attire:
      • Men's Casual Evening Attire
      • Men's Casual Day Attire
  • Women's Attire:
    • Women's Formal Attire:
      • Women's Formal Evening Attire (strictly to be worn after 6:00 PM only)
      • Woman's Formal Day Attire
    • Women's Business Attire
    • Women's Casual Attire:
      • Women's Casual Evening Attire:
        • The Coacktail Dress, etc.
      • Women's Casual Day Attire:


Operaguy 09:04, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Formal Wear versus Evening Wear[edit]

The definition of formal wear is contradictory. First it states that formal wear is synonymous with evening wear then it goes on to list all the different types of formal wear, of which evening wear is just one example. I deleted the reference to formal wear being the same thing as evening wear. Peter Marshall 19:10, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Consolidation of Wikipedia formal wear terminology[edit]

A significant drawback of a “public” or “open” encyclopedia-like Wikipedia is that there is no editor to ensure consistency among related articles. The articles regarding formal wear are a case in point with different authors using different terms to mean the same thing and vice versa. I propose that all formal wear terminology be consolidated in a single location and that related articles use this terminology consistently. The most logical place to establish this terminology would be the page describing dress codes (Social aspects of clothing) but it has (rightly) been tagged for a number of deficiencies and is therefore unacceptable. Therefore the next obvious choice seems to the Formal wear stub.

I have taken the liberty of beginning to standardize these terms. As part of this I have highlighted the intrinsic connection between civilian dress codes and the hierarchy of civilian formal wear. I have also changed a link that confuses dress codes with formal wear terms: I changed the “Evening dress” link to "White tie" because the linked article is only about white tie and not about the larger category of evening wear. (I have also requested that the Evening Dress page be renamed accordingly).

While I am very familiar with North American terminology, I am not as familiar with UK equivalents. If "morning dress" can be further divided into levels of formalities please add this information to this page! Similarly, it would be great to know how "evening dress" is subdivided today (I know one author divides it into "Dress coat" and "Dinner jacket" but I don't know if these terms are universal in the UK). If these articles are to be relevant they must make sense to readers in any English-speaking country!

I have been studying men's formal wear as a personal hobby for about three years now. My sources include Esquire's Encyclopedia of 20th Century Fashions, Men’s Fashion: The Complete Sourcebook, Handbook of English Costume in the 19th Century, Handbook of English Costume 1900-1950, Emily Post’s Etiquette 1922, 1937, 1945, 1955, 1969, 1975 and 1997 editions, Amy Vanderbilt’s Complete Book of Etiquette 1995 edition, The Indispensable Guide to Classic Men’s Clothing, The Encyclopedia of Men’s Clothes (CD ROM) Peter Marshall 22:50, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hierarchy of articles[edit]

I think that Formal wear and Formal occassions should be two distinct articles, although I agree that a hierachy of articles should exist in which one article is considered not only linked to but a part of another article and in which terms stay consistent and detail is at the correct level, with only a summary at the higher level (so the reader knows what is being linked to).

Men's vs Women's Categories[edit]

I think men's and women's formalwear should be kept separate. Writers knowledgable and interested in one may be less so with the other. This will become especially important if the history of formalwear is discussed, as things diverge considerably depending on whether we are talking mens or womenswear. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sator (talk • contribs)

There are already sections on Women's styles and Men's styles. They aren't the best (especially the whole list format), if you want to expand on one and add in some more historical or cultural facts I think that would be great. If you think the page needs reorganizing, be bold and show us what you think would be better! Finally if you have some reliable sources that you could add, this article could really use them :-) --Siobhan Hansa 13:39, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 4 June 2018[edit]

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No move. No support after 7 days. Cúchullain t/c 17:49, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Formal wear → Formal attire – Per WP:CONSISTENCY with Informal attire. Chicbyaccident (talk) 00:08, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose in this case. "Formal wear" gets a substantially greater multiple of Google hits. bd2412 T 12:16, 8 June 2018 (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.

@Cuchullain: Would you mind reopening the request, please? WP:CONSISTENCY has since gained even more relevance by the renaming of equivalent articles as seen on Talk:Semi-formal attire, and Talk:Casual attire. Chicbyaccident (talk) 20:06, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 21 June 2018[edit]

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 21:12, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Formal wear → Formal attire – New conditions since last request above: now per WP:CONSISTENCY with all equivalent and comparable articles. Please see: semi-formal attire, informal attire, and casual attire (new items recently moved for consistency reasons). Chicbyaccident (talk) 23:09, 21 June 2018 (UTC) --Relisting. bd2412 T 13:07, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support עם ישראל חי (talk) 14:31, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mild support, if it is indeed true that similar articles were renamed for good reason. I note the previous RM, "Formal wear" gets a substantially greater multiple of Google hits. I suspect that this is because "formal wear" is a high school term, a peculiar juxtaposition of the formal "formal" with the informal "wear". Attire is more formal. User:BD2412 should be invited to comment. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:51, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
SmokeyJoe: Well, I'd say they were moved for a good reason, in that the previous titles (semi-formal and casual) were less good than either the "wear" or "attire" versions. But in a choice between "wear" and "attire", "wear" is more common for all of them.--Cúchullain t/c 14:54, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per User:Cuchullain|Cúchullain and User:BD2412. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:57, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. As BD2412, the only participant, noted in the last RM, "formal wear" is the WP:COMMONNAME. It's more common on Google Books ([1] vs. [2] and is many times more common on Google News ([3] vs. [4]). Notably, Semi-formal attire and casual attire were moved not from "semi-formal wear" and "casual wear", but from semi-formal and casual. They could easily have been moved to semi-formal wear and casual wear, and in fact should be now, as those names are also their actual COMMONNAMEs as well as WP:CONSISTENT with this title ([5] vs. [6] [7] vs. [8]). Informal attire has been at that title a long time, but it's also not at its common name as the article actually discusses what's better known as business or office wear.--Cúchullain t/c 13:39, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, as before. I am a big fan of consistency in article titles - heck, I created WP:Consistency in article titles - but I remain convinced that the WP:COMMONNAME here is "wear", and that is what will most readily be searched for and recognized, irrespective of the age or generation in question. bd2412 T 14:09, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I am afraid "attire" more readily encopsulates "wear" rather than the other way around, as dealt with within a dress code context. That's one of the reasons I suppose "attire" was well-accepted in the other articles. That said, I would rather advocate "wear" as a consistant article title of them all - following formal wear, if that is what is going to result in here (although currently showing 3 for "attire", and 2 for "wear") rather than no consistency. Chicbyaccident (talk) 15:15, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"Wear" and "attire" are synonymous. I'd support shifting these articles to "wear" per WP:CONSISTENCY, but not all of them are a good fit (for instance, morning dress is far more common than either "morning wear" or "morning attire").--Cúchullain t/c 15:22, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the exceptions. Either way, from the above discussion it seems like regarding this article name it is leaning more towards "wear" than "attire". Perhaps also this should the per WP:CONSISTENCY apply to semi-formal attire, informal attire, and casual attire. At least we would then have achieved consistency across equivalent articles scope. Chicbyaccident (talk) 14:30, 26 June 2018 (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.

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. Community Tech bot (talk) 19:06, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Definitions of dress codes[edit]

Wikipedia (in this and other articles) defines the dress codes as follows: "Formal attire" being the most formal dress code, it is followed by semi-formal attire, equivalently based around daytime stroller, and evening black tie i.e. dinner suit (tuxedo), and evening gown for women. The lounge suit and cocktail dress in turn only comes after this level, associated with informal attire.

However, there is no citation I can find anywhere for these definitions. Can anyone provide one? Did some WP editor just make them up? They seem to contradict most sources I can find. -- Calion | Talk 04:12, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"in an anarchaic sense"[edit]

Is that meant to be "in an archaic sense"? Bruce Mardle (talk) 16:18, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Formal_wear&oldid=1194745771"