Talk:Cravat (early)

Origin

Maybe it should be stated that the origin of the cravat or necktie is debatable, since Chinese emperors (or soldiers) seem to have worn ties as those described in this article, in the way described in the article, long (very long) before the 17th c. (see Chinese clay army from 3rd c. B.C.) 69.171.130.61 (talk) 02:08, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cravats Later in History?

What about cravats worn later in history, such as Michael Caine or Clark Gable or Errol Flynn? It seems that this should be discussed on this page. I will include a sample link showing some images. http://thegentlemanblog.wordpress.com/2011/04/11/the-gentleman-and-the-cravat/ Missyagogo (talk) 00:28, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cravatia

Doesn't cravate mean "tie" in French, doesn't the word originate from french? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Autismal (talk • contribs) 13:55, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How is this Cravat any different from the ascot tie or modern cravat?

How is this Cravat any different from the ascot tie or modern cravat?tahc ^chat 18:55, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 21 March 2023

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 discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. The bulk of this discussion pertained to whether this article was the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the title "Cravat", a line of discussion that did not lead to a consensus emerging in either direction. Near the end of the RM, it was proposed that this article be merged with ascot tie; discussing that merge proposal further may be fruitful here. (non-admin closure) ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 14:45, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cravat (early) → Cravat
Cravat → Cravat (disambiguation)

– The word "early" here itself is ambiguous, and the fact that Cravat (modern) redirects to Ascot tie is more reason why this article should be considered WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. 〜 Festucalex • talk 08:53, 21 March 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 22:22, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support. This article was at the stable title Cravat until an undiscussed move in 2021. 162 etc. (talk) 16:33, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Consider a different disambiguated title. The word can also refer to an ascot or an ordinary necktie. It is ambiguous. The fact that another disambiguated meaning is redirected seems beside the point. As stated at WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT, "The fact that an article has a different title is not a factor in determining whether a topic is primary." —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 18:21, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per nom. The undiscussed move seems to have just been ill considered. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:10, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Not the primary term. Possibly is in the US, but in the UK we would usually use the term "cravat" rather than "Ascot" to refer to the modern item. However, I would support a different disambiguator if one could be found. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:18, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Necrothesp. There are ten bulleted entries listed upon the Cravat disambiguation page, with no indication that the entry for Cravat (early) delineates a subject of such renown as to overwhelm the combined notability of the remaining nine entries. Since the lead line of the article states, "The cravat (/krəˈvæt/) is a neckband, the forerunner of the modern tailored necktie and bow tie,...", I would support Cravat (early) → Cravat (neckband). —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 04:16, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That would not disambiguate it from an ascot. 162 etc. (talk) 19:05, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Just makes it awkward and unclear. Any confusion with the Ascot can be addressed with a DAB note at top. Walrasiad (talk) 04:13, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- You're ignoring the fact that to British people a cravat means what Americans call an Ascot! Why should American usage take priority? -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:05, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't care less about British people. Or American people for that matter. Wikipedia is not written for parochial audiences. That article already has a name, and its not "cravat". Whereas this has no other name but "cravat". A dab note can address peculiar local usages of a term well enough. Walrasiad (talk) 14:56, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That is not how Wikipedia works. It is just happenstance that the other article is entitled "Ascot tie". It could just as easily have been entitled "Cravat". But, what we should not do is assume that the article on the old-fashioned item should be entitled using the undisambiguated term, as that implies it is the primary topic for that term, which it clearly is not. In British English, the primary topic for that term is the modern item, not the old-fashioned item. It is no more a "local usage" than Ascot is. So, in actual fact, the proposal would mean that Wikipedia is written for "parochial" (American, in this case) audiences. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:17, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You seem a tad obsessed with Americans. Your fight isn't here, it's over there. The term "cravat" is actually quite an international term (French, German, etc.), and means different things in different countries. But this is actually the perfect article for this topic, since it is talking about "cravat" in its original sense - not the "American" sense (as you mistakenly assume), but in the original French/German/Austrian sense, i.e. "the Croatian", which is the origin of all the other "cravat" derivatives. This is actually an informative and useful article. Please don't turn into a nationalist pissing contest. Walrasiad (talk) 21:56, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody is turning anything into a "nationalist pissing contest", as you would know if you got off your high horse and actually bothered to read what you're commenting on. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:48, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. An alternative would be to merge the articles, as they do appear to be largely covering the same ground and I'm not sure there is a need for two separate articles. They could then be entitled either Ascot tie or Cravat, with one redirecting to the other, and the article currently at Cravat could be moved to Cravat (disambiguation) as this is the clear primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:20, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Comitatenses, Roman uniforms?

Ancient Roman "Comitatenses" troops are often depicted with necktie-like wear. 64.52.139.54 (talk) 18:22, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]