Talk:Body jewelry sizes
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
When O[...]g leaves off.
[edit]Originally: in this article, I wrote (well, I didn't write it, it was from one or the other articles that I pulled this from) that jewelry sizes less than 1⁄2" thick are measured with gauges, and that 1/2" and bigger are in inches. Whelps, yesterday (2012-05-26) happened to find me back at my piercer's shop, and we chatted and I showed her this page's chart; and she said au contraire, for the jewelry she measures for and gets in, the highest gauge they go to is OOg above which she uses fractions-- Namely, for her and for all the other shops in town, they start with fractions right with 7⁄16", even though that's less than 1/2". Then she said that stuff from the UK sometimes in 000g and 0000g (to her apparent annoyance, I sensed)-- and those are more than the 7/16ths mark that is her starting point for fractions.
Anyway, my tidy graphic plan of a straight gauges column down the page to 1/2" and then a clean handover from that column to the fractions of an inch column is out the window, and I'm going to show sizes up to 0000g, interlaced at relevant points with fractions of an inch. Also, she didn't take immediate real notice of the "(~x)" notation to mean "only very vaguely x!", so I'll put in actual "approx", or drop the sort of particularly "forced" fractions when there's gauge close above and below. Luckily our chart has pleeeennnnnnnnty of spare sideways space.
I'll fill in data from what fractions she uses... which she says is always increments of 16ths (albeit with reducing to 4ths when you can cancel, as with 3/4), so my best-fit fraction of 4/9ths was quite useless, she said. No big crisis, just me pulling more from that Wikimedia PDF: A chart comparing all known wire gauges and having the chart be unavoidably less tidy (as reality often forces things to be).
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Body jewelry sizes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304040034/http://www.tribalectic.com/store/pc/viewPrd.asp?idproduct=3361&idcategory=111&piercingLocationID=33&mt=&gauge=&IDBrand= to http://www.tribalectic.com/store/pc/viewPrd.asp?idproduct=3361&idcategory=111&piercingLocationID=33&mt=&gauge=&IDBrand=
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:35, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
[edit]The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:36, 12 July 2022 (UTC)